Re: A URI for the class of SOAP MEPs

Hi Tim,

On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 10:00 -0500, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
> > the suggestion to use a section URI for the concept defined in the
> > section was first (to my knowledge) discussed in WS-Description WG,
> > as those WG members who aren't SemWeb-fluent didn't see the point of
> > inventing new URIs for the purpose of the RDF mapping.
> RDF is made of URIs.
> Making up a URI should not be a big deal.
> Just make an RDF document and stick in what you know about the
> needed things.

The thing is that in W3C, one group should not make up URIs for things
owned by another group, so we (WS-Desc) contacted XMLP. In order to
possibly simplify the process, we suggested one URI in their namespace.
I see now that the current thinking is against combining the resource
with its description (same URI for both things), so the suggested URI
turned out to be the wrong one. XMLP will consider this and give us a
better URI. Not too big of a deal. 8-)

Personally, I agree that URIs are cheap, but if you want to have
something at the end of the URI, it may suddenly become not quite cheap
enough. 8-)

> If analogy is needed, by analogy with
> mapping non-XML format into XML,  it as though "some members
> of the group not so familiar with XML didn't see the need to make
> up tags when defining a mapping into XML"

Good analogy, except in our case XML people already know about URIs,
they only don't understand RDF; whereas in the analogy above the "some
members" would not know about tags so it would be easier to convince
them that they are cheap. 8-)

Thanks for the replies,


Received on Friday, 20 January 2006 16:28:52 UTC