Re: "On the Web" vs "On the Semantic Web" (was Re: resources and URIs)

----- Original Message -----
From: "ext Tim Bray" <tbray@textuality.com>
To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@neonym.net>
Cc: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>; "Jonathan Borden"
<jonathan@openhealth.org>; "pat hayes" <phayes@ihmc.us>; <www-tag@w3.org>;
"Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Sent: 17 July, 2003 20:25
Subject: Re: "On the Web" vs "On the Semantic Web" (was Re: resources and
URIs)


> Michael Mealling wrote:
>
> > In my 'layered' view, the SW is a layer above the web, and as such a SW
> > 'resource' contains at its heart, a Web resource. You _could_ think of
> > it this way: it's the same object with multiple interfaces, the
> > Uri-Resource view found in 2396 being the equivalent of an IUnknown
> > interface (just without the ability to query for  the other
> > interfaces)'. As you go up the layers you end up with more available
> > interfaces to pick from....
>
> I have a lot of sympathy with this world-view.  Is there anyone who
> really doesn't like it?

You'd have to explain to me how a WebResource or
SemanticWebResource can "contain" a resource (in
the sense that a dog can "contain" a mammal).

And since the classes of Web Resource and
SemanticWebResource are (IMO) partially disjunct,
and as membership in one or both classes is
affected by the treatment of the resources in
question, not any change to those resources,
I have a hard time seeing any "layering" going
on (of the type that Michael suggests).

Patrick

--

Patrick Stickler
Nokia, Finland
patrick.stickler@nokia.com

Received on Friday, 18 July 2003 05:53:36 UTC