- From: Garret Wilson <garret@globalmentor.com>
- Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 17:18:57 -0700
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Sandro, Sandro Hawke wrote: >>3. Using only RDF capabilities (e.g. no OWL or custom ontologies), the >>set of resources referenced by URIs do not intersect with the set of >>resources we reference using literals. > > I think you're confusing the fact that > > (1) one cannot say formally, in RDF alone, that some URI > identifies, for example, the integer one. > > with the false idea that > > (2) no URI can identify the integer one. (which would follow from > what you said above.) OK, fair enough, based upon what I said. Let me rephrase it, which will show that this has nothing to do with actually identifying the integer one: 3. Using only RDF capabilities (e.g. no OWL or custom ontologies), there is no way to indicate which, if any, members of the set of resources referenced by URIs are the same as those in the set of resources we reference using literals. None of what I said attempted to identify the integer one. I'm content to assume that *somehow* the processor associates the lexical form "1", for example, with the integer one, just as I'm content to let the processor associate "uri:x-example-document" with some XHTML file in the sky. I *would* be worried, however, if I had the following two descriptions and RDF did not recognize that I am not referencing the same resource, whatever that resource happens to be: <rdf:Description rdf:about="uri:x-example-document"> <dc:creator>Garret Wilson</dc:creator> </rdf:Description> <rdf:Description rdf:about="uri:x-example-document"> <mime:contentType>application/xhtml+xml</mime:contentType> </rdf:Description> As you mention, RDF doesn't say how to associate "uri:x-example-document" with some stream of bytes. But every time I use "uri:x-example-document", it better refer to the same thing, whatever it is. But if I talk about the resource identified by the literal, "Garret Wilson," why can't I use a URI as well? Why does there have to be a usability wall separating all resources identified by literals, and those identified by resources? You're right---some resources may be in both sets, but the result is perhaps worse---there's no way to know from the framework which resources are the same. I could be talking about "Garret Wilson" and "uri:x-people-garretwilson", but are those the same resources? Who knows? We allow datatypes to be specified for typed literals---why not allow reference URIs as well for all literals? <rdf:Description> <ex:score rdf:about="ex:score" rdf:datatype="xsd:integer">10</ex:score> </rdf:Description> <rdf:Description rdf:about="ex:score"> <ex:divisibleBy>2</ex:divisibleBy> <ex:divisibleBy>5</ex:divisibleBy> </rdf:Description> What harm could that do? Garret
Received on Saturday, 27 September 2003 20:19:22 UTC