W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2002

Re: fragment identifiers

From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 06:44:59 -0400
Message-ID: <004401c232ff$286879a0$0201a8c0@ne.mediaone.net>
To: "Joshua Allen" <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>

Joshua Allen wrote:


> why this must be the case -- e.g. what breaks if we allow something
> http://example.org/term/Car to refer to the concept "Car"? RDF would
> happy as a clam with this.

There are systems built on RDF which are NOT "happy as a clam" with
this.  EARL is one example.

RDF itself is neutral; at best you could say that RDF is ambivalent.
The systems which use RDF will NOT be ambivalent about identity, though.


How does EARL break? If EARL is broken, I suspect _something else_ broke it.
Educate us.

Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2002 07:00:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:55:52 UTC