- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 06:58:25 -0500 (EST)
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>
- cc: Bill dehOra <BdehOra@interx.com>, <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Yes and no... Yes we can identify through descriptions as well as URIs; but no, contrary to http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/Primer there are a bunch of propblems (mostly involving quotation and trust) that imho this doesn't entirely work for. The problem I was getting at in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/2001Jan/0052.html was that if we pretend all things have a universally agreed and widely known URI, identification strategies when dealing with quoted RDF aren't a big deal. When we go real world and indulge (as we'll have to) in identification-through-description as per foaf/mbox discussion you mention and Pat Hayes earlier essay on this topic, we get into a pickle wr.t. quotation. Reason is that RDF's flattening of everything down to one level makes it rather fiddly to distinguish a description at the quoted level ('john believed mary's flatmate had a mailbox of ...') to a description at the quoting level, where the expression is used merely to pick out an individual. Dan On Thu, 18 Jan 2001, Sean B. Palmer wrote: > > > @prefix : <#> > > > :bill :loves :jane > > > > Sure. Now are we giving them a URI before we serialize this stuff > > up and send it on its way, > > Serialize and send on its way? "Bill (the URI)" would be described in the > file itself, or linked to a schema URI: in other words, something that > asserts that the uri <#bill> is a representation for a human... from the N3 > primer:- > > "Not everything has a URI, as you can talk about something > by just using its properties. But using a URI allows other > documents and systems to easily reuse your information." > - http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/Primer > > We just had these conversations about representing people by their > mailboxes on RDF IG... that's what I'm taking my cue from. > > > or are we giving incoming string literals URIs? > > We're tying properties to a URI, that's all. The URI itself isn't > important: it doesn't need to exist - we're just talking about it. When you > talk about it, you talk about something that has the same properties as > Bill, e.g. :bill = Bill. Then, other SW machines can process those > some"thing" with those same properties by effering to that URI. It wouldn't > matter if all of this was on Bill's home machine, but it's on the Web. The > Digital Signatrues idea runs parallel and crosses this. At some point we'll > need Bill to sign these properties if they are to believed I guess. > > -- > Kindest Regards, > Sean B. Palmer > @prefix : <http://infomesh.net/2001/01/n3terms/#> . > [ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] has :homepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> . >
Received on Friday, 19 January 2001 06:58:32 UTC