- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 07:29:59 -0700
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: WWW-Tag <www-tag@w3.org>
Dan Connolly wrote:
> Actually, no, there aren't any widely deployed
> web protocols for getting a representation of
> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
> You can only GET a representation of
> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns
I'm easily confused; I type it into a browser with the # and I get a
screenfull of information.
>>An information resource is something that is primarily information.
>>That's all (I think). -Tim
>
> I thought the way I made the distinction
> would appeal to you, since it's a distinction
> that's grounded in running code and bits on the wire.
Good point, but unfortunately I just don't think the distinction is very
meaningful. It seems clear that "The set of all URIs for which no
reprsentations can be provided, in principle" is empty.
On the other hand, I think that it's obvious that
http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/02/09/-big/Teddy.jpg is a
different kind of thing than urn:isbn:131-14-14-355515 or a URI
purporting to represent a person. That, I thought, was what we were
trying to capture, TimBL's distinction between a person and a picture of
a person. And it's independent of whether representations are available.
--
Cheers, Tim Bray
(ongoing fragmented essay: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/)
Received on Tuesday, 29 July 2003 10:30:02 UTC