- From: Giosue Vitaglione <giosue@umich.edu>
- Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 15:49:52 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Lee Jonas <lee.jonas@cakehouse.co.uk>
- cc: "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <charles@w3.org>, "'Aaron Swartz'" <aswartz@swartzfam.com>, RDF Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, RDF Logic <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Hey folks. This thread is getting very big. I would invite all of us to write only things that we know exactly, distinguishing between facts, hypothesis, questions or opinions. PLease, let me add an important point: RDF needs URI. Subject, predicate and object are URI. (or literal, ok) I like the way this is explained at: http://www710.univ-lyon1.fr/~champin/rdf-tutorial/ URL are locators, we all agree. URL are also URI, they identify the location. URN are names. The identify something, they are URI. I love the drawing at: http://www.w3.org/Addressing/ RFC2396 tells more about that. Beside that, there is the discussion about how appropriate is to use URL as identifiers because locations change and re-assigned, URI shouldn't. I hope this helps the discussion. Regards, Giosue' Vitaglione On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Lee Jonas wrote: > > [...] > >From what you say, use of URLs in RDF must be treated with extreme caution. > Unless a publisher guarantees that they won't change the fundamental nature > of the resource identified by a URL, you cannot rely on it to identify what > you intend it to. > > This seems like the most compelling argument for using URNs for identifying > anything other than representation mappings yet! > > regards > > Lee >
Received on Thursday, 12 April 2001 15:49:58 UTC