W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2007

Re: Preferable alternative to 'resource'

From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 16:43:53 -0400
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>, Technical Architecture Group WG <www-tag@w3.org>, Susie Stephens <susie.stephens@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20070927204353.GC9855@mercury.ccil.org>

Pat Hayes scripsit:

> >Subjects, in accordance with the OED's definition 13a: "That which forms,
> >or is chosen as, the matter of thought, consideration, or inquiry; a
> >topic, theme."  Using "subject" rather than "object" or "thing" allows
> >us to talk about the imaginary as well as the real.
> Yes, that does avoid a potential problem with "thing". And its close
> to, but not identical to, "topic".

In topic-maps terminology, subjects are what the SW calls resources,
whereas topics are concrete partial models of subjects, data structures
in memory or an XML document.  A topic map, therefore, contains topics
but describes subjects.

> Just make sure to avoid the grammatical implication, is all.

Or any of the other fourteen main senses of "subject" the noun,
to say nothing of "subject" the adjective or the verb.

My corporate data's a mess!                     John Cowan
It's all semi-structured, no less.              http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
    But I'll be carefree                        cowan@ccil.org
    Using XSLT
Received on Thursday, 27 September 2007 20:44:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:18 UTC