- From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
- Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 10:31:19 -0500
- To: Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net>, "Tim Bray" <tbray@textuality.com>
- Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>
Bill de hÓra wrote: > > Tim Bray wrote: > > > How about a slight recasting of that: > > > > 1. Different URIs can identify the same resource, in the opinion of the > > creators and users of that resource. > > 2. The Web is designed on the principle that a single URI identifies a > > single resource which does not change. In practice, this principle is > > someties violated (insert list of nasty examples), and software must > > often deal with the consequences, but such inconsistency is always > > damaging and SHOULD be avoided. -Tim See my prior message on why the URI:resource relationship is many:1. > > Clearer, thanks. But abuse of this principle also affects > specifications such as RDF, as well as web software. For example it > will mean we have to merge RDF graphs with great caution before > inferences can be made and we have to be careful about RDF queries > that span multiple graphs. > > If the rdf-wg were happy to add words to the primer about how > breaking this principle interplays with the function that determines > the denotation of a URI, that would help greatly. That is, when > merging two RDF graphs, be aware that a URI used in graph 1 might > not have the same denotation as it does in graph 2. > That is an issue for RDF. The RDF Semantics document goes to length to describe the fact that time-varying changes in resources are not dealt with in this version of RDF. Algorithsms to merge graphs will generally assume that when you use a URI in two places you mean the same thing in both places. (places can be spatially and temporally separated). Jonathan
Received on Saturday, 25 January 2003 10:53:36 UTC