- From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net>
- Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 12:43:37 +0100
- To: "'RDF Interest'" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
- Cc: "'Patrick Stickler'" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, "'Joshua Allen'" <joshuaa@microsoft.com>, "'Paul Prescod'" <paul@prescod.net>, "'Miles Sabin'" <miles@milessabin.com>
[[ moved from www-tag: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Jul/0109.html apologies for any loss of context ]] > -----Original Message----- > From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of Patrick Stickler > > It seems the real problem here is the implicit overloading of > URIs by the Web architecture which is far too low a > resolution for Semantic Web agents. > > Yes, in theory, the Web architecture provides mechanisms to > name each variant representation separately -- and thus, one > could then describe each variant to express its > characteristics and relation to the actual resource -- but > that is seldom used in practice, and certainly does not > appear to be encouraged by the Web architecture. More specifically: RDF agents would do well to be able to reason in terms of URIs that point to only one resource, instead of reasoning with mime-types and they would do well to be able to interact in some other form than HTTP conneg. Personally I have no problem building layered reasoning systems with conneg and mimetype resolution for the time being. That's all ok: layered reasoning architectures will be the way to build robust systems for the SemWeb (a la Muller's INTERRAP). As for the level of SemWeb stuff that Tim BL has been keynoting for a few years and for the requirements of the WebOnt crowd. Well, I guess http style resolution isn't entirely adequate. This is because we want to get a level where RDF agents interact *with each other* and not just with the current Web accessible resources. The discussion on the TAG seems to have been entirely about agents doing negotiating with resources for representations rather than agents talking among themselves about resources. The latter is both where things get interesting and where overloading URIs, in Patrick's sense of overloading, may cause problems in terms of merging RDF graphs and avoiding junk entailments. If someone can show me this simply can not be done with the current Web architecture, I'll acknowledge there is an architectural issue that the Tag need to discuss. Otherwise I'm inclined to say let people build some RDF infrastructure for a while and see what happens. Bill de hÓra .. Propylon www.propylon.com
Received on Friday, 5 July 2002 07:44:12 UTC