Re: yet another sidetrack on what a URI identifies

On Friday, Jan 24, 2003, at 12:27 US/Eastern, Jos De_Roo wrote:

> [that was indeed a very clear talk at www2000
> ...]
>> As TimBL mentioned, cwm implements the integration
>> of all this stuff... connecting KR to WWW. The
>> log:semantics primitive in cwm is a simpler model
>> than the 9711theory/HTTP model... but I think
> right, I think I understand that after today
> and we are really mistaken when not making the
> distinction between e.g. the doc:Work and the log:Formula
> (that's quite a shock and I'm hoping to repair soon...)

I haven't looked at what you have done there, but
if you have just coalesced the notions of doc:Work
and log:Formula, for example by using
<foo>  :says  { whatever } rather than
[ is log:semantics of <foo> ] log:includes { whatever }
then that is just a greater form of simplification,
which is still a valid system.  It doesn't give you
such a access to what is going on.
It is just like the simplification which
log:semantics is when it doesn't model all
of the HTTP protocol.

> Jos De Roo, AGFA


Received on Tuesday, 28 January 2003 19:10:55 UTC