Re: "Resource" (RDF vocabulary definitions)

I understand what you're saying.
But the intent seems to be to represent all existents on the web.  In that case, "Resource" and "existent" are absolutely identical.
So why use two different words when they have exactly the same meaning?  
If you want to distinguish existents which are represented on the web from those which are not represented on the web, then it makes sense to have two words.
============ 
Dick McCullough 
knowledge := man do identify od existent done
knowledge haspart list of proposition

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jon Hanna 
  To: RDF-Interest 
  Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 6:35 AM
  Subject: RE: "Resource" (RDF vocabulary definitions)



  > Here's my slightly off-topic two cents worth:
  > "Resource" is a very unfortunate choice of words.  In my
  > mind it has always denoted something which can be found
  >on the internet, which would suggest that it is
  > "knowledge". i.e., propositions which state facts about
  > existents.

  On the web "resource" means something that is represented on the internet.
  The document (whether an RDF document, a HTML document, or whatever) you get
  from browsing is a representation of a resource. (See
  http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/).

  Hence a web resource is the existent identified by a URI, not the knowledge
  (or for that matter untruths :) that you may be able to obtain by
  dereferencing the URI (though not all URIs can be dereferenced).

  This makes particular sense when you consider that you may not just GET a
  document, but may interact with a resource using POST. For example, a
  web-based mail service like hotmail would have a resource that enabled you
  to send an email, but you wouldn't "download" that resource as such.

  RDF inherits the term since it is intended to be used on the web.