- From: Xiaoshu Wang <wangxiao@musc.edu>
- Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 11:05:04 +0100
- To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- CC: Misha Wolf <Misha.Wolf@reuters.com>, W3C-TAG <www-tag@w3.org>, semantic-web-ig list <semantic-web-ig.list@reuters.com>
Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > > I inadvertently omitted "jpg" and "png" in a couple of places. Here is > the corrected part: > > From this mindset, I will at some time later encounter > http://example.com/depict/alan. Upon accessing it, I get a series of > bits. Upon examining the bits, I find that they are the same set of > bits as the jpg document. I say, oh, http://example.com/depict/alan > identifies the same document as http://example.com/depict/alan.jpg. > Conclusion http://example.com/depict/alan is an alias for > http://example.com/depict/alan.jpg Your logic that "two resources with the same set of bits == same resource" are flawed. I can well have encode a text file to have the same set of bits as your image. Would you can them the same resource? In RDF world, you can only infer from what is asserted, nothing else. Xiaoshu
Received on Sunday, 30 September 2007 10:06:43 UTC