Re: resources and URIs

> I agree that is important and useful and 
> hopefully will be possible one way or another. 
> However I think we need both data and metadata.

Yes, however will that metadata be about *resources* as with RDF, or about
*representations* as with HTML <meta> tags and ALT attributes and embedded
JPEG/PNG metadata and so on?

> Mostly the SW wants to use URIs with fragIDs (ie 
> the aa:bb#cc thingies) to denote other things 
> than documents altogether. Maybe this is 
> consistent with what you are saying, I'm not sure 
> what it means to say what a fragID refers to all 
> by itself.

Sorry, I did not say that clearly. I meant that URI+fragID is no longer a
URI, it is a new syntactic construct (URI ref) which acts as a shorthand
for a URI plus some additional locator that operates on representations.

Using this construct to denote something other than a fragment of a
representation available at a particular URI seems harmful, and is
certainly underspecified.

Best regards,

Michael

-- 
YesLogic Prince prints XML!
http://yeslogic.com