Re: Mistaken identity?

Quoting "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@comcast.net>:

> 
> Jon Hanna wrote:
> 
> >> Just because you use a particular URI as an rdf identifier doesn't
> >>  automatically mean that the rdf resource is equal to the web page 
> >> returned when you dereference the uri.
> > 
> > 
> > No, it is equal to the resource a representation of which is returned
> >  when you dereference the URI.
> > 
> 
> No, sorry, but that just isn't so.  Let me quote from one of the RDF
> Recommendations, the RDF Semantics document -
> 
> "The semantics does not assume any particular relationship between the
> denotation of a URI reference and a document or Web resource which can
> be retrieved by using that URI reference in an HTTP transfer protocol,
> or any entity which is considered to be the source of such documents."

I read that as good separation between specs.

1. URIs provide a way to identify resources.
2. HTTP provides a way to GET or PUT representations of resources, or POST
represetations into them.
3. RDF provides a way to describe relationships between resources identified by
URIs, or between resources and literals.
4. Some mad scheme I think up on the way home tonight (RDS - REM Deprived
Specification) does something else with resources, though it probably doesn't
have much value when re-examined after some sleep.

That HTTP, RDF and indeed RDS don't have anything to say about each other is
dulce et decorum; but they both depend on the use of URIs to identify resources
and when a URI is used in both HTTP and RDF then it sould identify the same
resource (or it's a pretty lousy identifier, not an identifier at all really).

-- 
Jon Hanna
<http://www.hackcraft.net/>
"…it has been truly said that hackers have even more words for
equipment failures than Yiddish has for obnoxious people." - jargon.txt

Received on Wednesday, 23 June 2004 18:32:06 UTC