- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 11:38:46 -0500
- To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Norm Walsh writes: > In practice, I cannot think of a single, reasonable example of a > single resource that has multiple natures and purposes, but I suppose > it is possible. > [...] > In the resulting model, something.xyz has two natures and two > purposes and > there's no way to tell which pairs go together. Is it a problem if there's a single nature and multiple purposes? At the risk of completely confusing the discussion, what about the RDDL document itself? It's a resource associated with the namespace. It clearly can be viewed as having multiple purposes (designating a stylesheet, designating a schema, etc.) While a RDDL document probably doesn't want to point to itself, I can see a RDDL document saying: hey, look over there, that other RDDL document has information about this namespace too. Or, since what you've got is an abstract model, with multiple optional serializations, you could imagine an N3 serialization wanting to point to the RDDL and indicating: you can get a schema from it, you can get a stylesheet from it etc. Worth worrying about? I'm not sure. -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 --------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 5 March 2007 16:39:02 UTC