- From: Nikita Ogievetsky <nogievet@cogx.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 01:05:30 -0400
- To: "Uche Ogbuji" <uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com>
- Cc: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <02e601c1debb$01f5a150$0e01a8c0@t8000>
Hi Uche > Hi, Nikita. I must say that if anyone help make me understand this, you > can. Glad to hear that :-) > > > And let me re-iterate that I disagree with this. Eric Prud'hommeaux said > > the > > > same thing, so I'm rather frightened a practice of this might be forming. > > > > > > The straw man is that RDF uses http://uche.ogbuji.net to represent the > > person > > > "Uche Ogbuji". All the discussion about "published subjects", and odd > > tricks > > > with unambiguousProperty seem to be solutions to this supposed problem. > > > > > > But I don't see why anyone thinks that RDF says http://uche.ogbuji.net > > *is* > > > the person. > > > > If anybody thinks that way then it is not me. > > What I am saying is that given a statement like this: > > > > http://uche.ogbuji.net :characteristics :very-interesting > > > > will leave many people puzzled whether I mean that you are a very > > interesting person or > > that your website is definitely worth looking at. :-) > > It shouldn't leave least bit puzzled. It is obviously talking aboout the Web > site, not the person. > > > > If enough people agree that urn:folks:uche.ogbuji.net is an acceptable > > > published subject identifier for "Uche Ogbuji", then they have already > > done all > > > the work RDF needs to take advantage of this in description of the person. > > > > Well... what is the critical mass of "enough" ? When "enough" is enough? > > This depends on the use and the users. In come cases, only one person need be > involved. In others, all RDF users must agree (e.g. agreement on how to treat > rdfs:Resource). Yes of course. This is the (TM) author's conscious decision. It is totally up to her/him. > > > I don't see that Topic Maps gains anything with this built-in indirection, > > > except one of the most complex data models I have ever seen for a > > description > > > language (puts CIM to shame, I must say). > > > > The gain is in avoiding confusing situations like the one that I mentioned > > above. > > But I don't see the confusion. RFC 1738, which governs the URI > http://uche.ogbuji.net makes it clear that this URI locates/identifies the > document that is retrieved using HTTP and that address. Why would anyone > thing it represents a person? Actually, a correct statement would be something like: One would think that I use http://uche.ogbuji.net to indicate a person if in my RDF Topic Map I have: :Uche rtm:/indicatedBy http://uche.ogbuji.net; a :person. > > I also do not see how this makes data model complex. > > Maybe I'm just thick, but I just do not come close to understanding Topic > Maps. There are just too many moving parts interacting in confusing ways. I > must say, though, from observice the discussiuons at KT, that I'm not sure > anyone really does. > > > > For one it allows equal use of more then one PSI for a topic so that > > people speaking about a topic indicated by "urn:folks:uche.ogbuji.net" > > and people speaking about a topic indicated by "http://uche.ogbuji.net" will > > understand each other. > > And people speaking about 404 errors at "http://uche.ogbuji.net" will not > > interfere. > > ( I ma getting a "Not Found" message) > > :-)) > > Really? works from here, and http://validator.w3.org/ finds it OK as well > (even though it finds it invalid: I'll look into this). With IE6 I am getting redirected to http://uche.ogbuji.net:8080/uche.ogbuji.net/uche.ogbuji.net/main.doc?xslt=ma in.xslt (see attachment). Actually, with Netscape it works just fine (just tried it). > > > This is *not* a flame on Topic Maps. TM has things that RDF desperately > > > needs, such as scopes and merging, but I don't think that the > > > subject/occurrence (or whatever) distinction is one of the things RDF > > needs. > > > > Well there are other things too... > > Perhaps. Anything in particular we should be discussing? > Well, one other thing that keep bothering me is that RDF uses XML IDs to create vocabulary entries. For this reason "Nikita Ogievetsky" is an invalid entry. Topic Maps use baseName-s for that; and id attribute serves purely for addressing purposes. (See http://www.cogx.com/xtm2rdf/extreme2001#slide54) --Nikita
Attachments
- text/html attachment: 404_Not_Found.htm
Received on Monday, 8 April 2002 01:06:37 UTC