Re: MISC: Internet Media Type registration: proposed TAG finding

On Thu, 2002-05-30 at 13:13, patrick hayes wrote:
[...]
> >When I first saw the term 'RDF agent' in this thread, I
> >inferred that it meant something that would draw all
> >conclusions that are sanctioned by the RDF model
> >theory, plus any others it was instructed to make.
> >By that definition, cwm and Euler are
> >RDF agents.
> 
> Unfortunately, so is almost any reasoner on the planet, since RDF is 
> such a tiny subset of first-order logic. So the concept of 'RDF 
> agent' that you are using seems almost vacuous. Also, it seems to 
> have nothing particularly to do with RDF, so I am at a loss to 
> understand why you find it a useful notion.

I never claimed 'RDF agent' is a useful notion; I dind't introduce
it into the conversation. I'm happy to see it go.

[...]
> BTW, I wish that you (or someone) would articulate this 'whole 
> framework' vision that you seem to have. Right now it seems to be 
> part of the W3C secret lore, but isn't being vouchsafed to the rest 
> of us. I know y'all are very busy, but peer review does have some 
> advantages.

Enough conspiracy theory, OK, Pat? There are no secrets,
and I have done my level best to comply to your every
request on this matter.

To reiterate: the 'whole framework' is explained, in bumper-sticker
form, thus:

  The Resource Description Framework (RDF) integrates a variety of
  applications from library catalogs and world-wide directories to
  syndication and aggregation of news, software, and content to
  personal collections of music, photos, and events using XML
  as an interchange syntax. 
      -- http://www.w3.org/RDF/

That's hardly a secret; in fact, if you're trying to find
out about RDF, you almost can't help finding it. It's
the #1 hit in google, for example. http://www.google.com/search?q=RDF

I have tried to explain the framework in the terminology
you're familiar with...

> >On the contrary: I suggest there's an emerging protocol for
> >introducing new vocabularies into the framework, and that
> >documents labelled with this media type are part of that protocol.
> 
> What emerging protocol?

Deja vu...

PatH:
|> I take the phrase 'Resource Development Framework' to refer to a 
|> rather limited database language based on triples, as defined in the 
|> documents being produced now by the RDF Core WG. If it means 
|> something else, will someone PLEASE say CLEARLY what that other thing
|> is?  I would like to know in case I'm supposed to be writing a model 
|> theory for it.
DanC:
|'Clearly' is in the eye of the beholder, but I'll try...
  -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0207.html


> 1. What has the media type got to do with this discussion? (are we 
> going to have different inferences when something is displayed on a 
> TV screen from when it is printed on colored paper??)

Hello? check the subject line.

Er... it seems you're missing some essential context. I don't
think further discussion is likely to be productive unless
you're familiar with Internet media types and their
role in web architecture.

For handy reference, the document that started all this
discussion is:

  TAG Finding: Internet Media Type registration, consistency of use
  http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2002/0129-mime


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 14:32:00 UTC