W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > September 2004

Re: web proper names

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 17:38:33 -0400
To: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@comcast.net>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-ID: <20040920213833.GU11606@homer.w3.org>

* Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@comcast.net> [2004-09-20 17:28-0400]
> Harry Halpin wrote:
> >
> >Also, as regards Passim's predicates:
> >1) subjectIsTheThingReturnedByThisURI
> >2) theDocumentAtThisUriDescribesTheSubject
> >3) theDocumentAtThisUriIsAboutTheSubject
> >
> >I would replace "Document" with "Representation", and I'm not sure
> >about this "About" versus "Describes" distinction. Seems unclear.
> "About" as I used it here means the main subject of the web page (or 
> other retrievable) resource.  An example would be an encyclopedia 
> article about water.  The purpose of the page is related to the subject 
> (here, water), and is not intended to explain the use of any URI 
> identifier for water, such as http://www.example.com/water.

This sounds similar to what we have in FOAF; foaf:topic and
foaf:primaryTopic. Details (such as they are) in http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/

Idea is a relationship between a Document and a thing that that doc 
is about. In the primaryTopic case, _the_ thing that the doc is 
primarily about.

In general, given the shiftiness of the notion of 'aboutness' I suspect
it might be best to defer to documents' own claims re what they're
about. But that's orthogonal I suspect...

Received on Monday, 20 September 2004 21:38:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:52 UTC