- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:02:47 -0500
- To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
- Cc: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>, semantic-web@w3.org, W3C TAG <www-tag@w3.org>
On Jan 20, 2006, at 12:01, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote: > Jacek Kopecky: > > 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-) Indeed. > I think we're all set for now. The chair of the XMLP workgroup has > agreed [1] to put creation of an appropriate URI onto the agenda of > an upcoming XMLP teleconference. While there is some small risk > that XMLP would for good or bad reason decide not to do something > satisfactory, I think we should hope for the best, and suspend > further discussion here. Once XMLP comes up with a proposed > direction, I'll send a pointer to www-tag@w3.org and semantic- > web@w3.org, as well as to the WSDL WG, so you'll all have a chance > to register concerns. Should the XMLP WG decide to mint a URI, as > we hope, I will remind them of the desirability that the URI > resolve. In the meantime, I'd like to believe we're all set. The URI should be the URI of an RDF document # a local identifier. The RDF document should define basic information about the class, that it is a class, label, comment, etc. If the URI is being minted as part of the RDF mapping, then I don't see a reason from the document being in anything other than RDF. > [..] Tim > >
Received on Friday, 20 January 2006 18:03:13 UTC