- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 21:41:16 -0500
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
>On Sat, 19 May 2001, pat hayes wrote: > > > > > > >: pat hayes: > > >:I am still trying to > > >: find out what 'resource' means, but Dan Connolly tells me that: > > >: the standard [definition of resource] is RFC2396: > > > > > >In RDF, a resource is something identified by a URI (that may have > > >anchor ids) as per rfc2396. That's all there is to it. > > > > Oh. The trouble is, the reason I wanted to find out what resources > > were was in part so that I could find out what URIs were. URLs I > > understand - they are a kind of global file-name - but the W3C folks > > seem to think that URIs are something much more comprehensive than > > URLs: they *seem* to be saying that anything in the universe that can > >"some W3C folks", please. There are a few of us, we all seem to be URI >enthusiasts but ascribing a common technical view to the lot of us is a >bit premature. Sorry. > > > be referred to by any language can be indicated by a URI, so that if > > I want to talk about the electron density of the Oort cloud, or a > > grain of sand on Pensacola beach, well then I just use a URI. (I > > don't know quite HOW to do this, but I'm willing to learn.) So that > > means that *anything* can be identifed by a URI, so *anything* is a > > resource. People who died five centuries ago are resources, leptons > > are resources, sets of integers are resources, Unicorns are > > resources, Father Christmas is a resource. > >Yes Good. So 'resource' is just a meaningless buzzword. We could transcribe it as 'entity' or 'thing'. I'm not complaining, just wanting to get that clear. It's something of a relief; now I can think of RDF as just being a 'description format', for example. >.... >Yes, URIs are just names. Names in a certain syntax and with some controls >over who gets to dish them out. URLs are too, though URLs tend to encode >information about how to get at the named thingy using networked >computers. URLs aren't simply file names: Yes, I know. I said 'kind of', but should have said something like 'globally addressable resource' or some such. Sorry, I meant only to indicate that the concept of a URL makes sense in a way that other URIs do not. >they've long been used to name >Web services (eg CGI scripts etc), internet mailboxes, format and language >negotiated resouces and various other kinds of thing that aren't commonly >considered 'files'. URI (and URL) syntax is specified in RFC2396. URIs are names for anything. But their syntax is restricted. Suppose I am in the state of knowing that, say, something exists which is satisfies some complicated description, and I want to use the logical rule of existential elimination to give this thing (that I know exists) a logical identifier, ie a name. To whom must I apply for permission to use a suitable URI? >URIs, sadly, aren't magic at all. Just useful. URIs are handy >(particularly in electronic publishing, web services etc) since we've an >agreed convention for devolving names to organisations and individuals >for use. Their use makes it easier to do database joins, at least for >descriptions of things that have widely agreed URI names (like Web pages, >mailboxes etc). This in turn makes it a little bit easier to talk about >things that don't have widely understood Web names, eg. we can talk about >you in DAML+OIL through using various URIs (phone number, home page, >mailbox) to pick you out. The common URI syntax just reduces the number of >different ways of writing down your phone number etc, making it a bit >easier for databases to join up scattered descriptions of you. This is an aside, but I fail to see how it does that. My phone number might occur on many different web pages in various different formats, and some of them might have an out-of-date number that is no longer my phone number. (In fact, all this is true.) > > >I find it's > > >useful way to think when it comes to implementing code. That may > > >seem a backways determination; if I create a URI do I create a > > >resource for it to identify? This is moot, the RDF machine can't > > >access a resource directly anyway, but it allows for the description > > >of say, unicorns. > > > > It does? How? > >(process point: if we're going to have a discussion about identification >and description of non-existent or hypothetical entities, please start a >new thread.) Will do. Pat --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Saturday, 19 May 2001 22:41:09 UTC