- From: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) <skw@hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:06:30 +0000
- To: "wangxiao@musc.edu" <wangxiao@musc.edu>
- CC: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, "Michael K. Bergman" <mike@mkbergman.com>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>, Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
Hello Xiaoshu, > -----Original Message----- > From: Xiaoshu Wang [mailto:wangxiao@musc.edu] > Sent: 10 April 2008 19:07 > To: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) > Cc: Jonathan Rees; Michael K. Bergman; www-tag@w3.org WG; Phil Archer > Subject: Re: Uniform access to descriptions > > Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) wrote: > > Xiaoshu, > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] > >> On Behalf Of Xiaoshu Wang > >> Sent: 10 April 2008 17:13 > >> To: Jonathan Rees > >> Cc: Michael K. Bergman; www-tag@w3.org WG; Phil Archer > >> Subject: Re: Uniform access to descriptions > >> > >> Jonathan Rees wrote: > >> > > > > <snip/> > > > > > >> Jonathan, > >> > >> I don't want to be annoying. But please make a clear and objective > >> definition of *description* for UA2D. > >> > >> Honestly, I don't think how you can separate UA2D from httpRange-14 > >> because you can only define *description* w.r.t. IR or non-IR. > >> > >> I bet if you think hard enough, you will find that *description* is the > >> same thing as *representation*. Inventing a synonymy won't solve any > >> problem. > >> > >> Xiaoshu > >> > > > > [In what follows "s/awww:resource/thing" if you prefer] > > > > With apologies for all the 'awww:...'ing, but Pat did ask > > that we speak very carefully. > > > > That one 'awww:resource' describes another 'awww:resource' > >(possibly amongst other 'awww:resource') is a relation > > between 'awww:resources' and other 'awww:resources' which > > describe them. > > > Yes, this is what we modeled in RDF (or described in human language). > Why do we want to move it into HTTP, Move *what* to HTTP... I didn't mention HTTP. > unless we want to drop RDF or human > language? I guess the answer to this question is obvious no. > > Let me model it in such so it is much clear: > > *resource* - (LINK) - *resource* should not stand. Don't understand what you mean by "(LINK)" and "should not stand". > Then *representation* - describes (LINK) - *resource*. This > is the next model we agreed upon. No... we don't agree. I can only make guesses at what you are trying to say. > Now, try to find a place for *description*? > > A given 'awww:resource' may have one or more 'awww:representations' > >(ephemeral messages which convey some > > view of current 'content' of the given 'awww:resource'). > > Those 'awww:representations' are *not* the give opps s/give/given above > > 'awww:resource' they are 'of' it, but they are not 'it'. I > > think that we, you an I have agreed on that many times already. > > > > 'awww:resources' that described also have 'awww:representations', > > but those are 'awww:representations' of the description > > (an 'awww:resource' that describes) and *not* 'awww:representations' of the described 'awww:resource'. > > > > Phew... > > > > So... Synonymy? No! > > > > Thanks, > > > > Stuart > > -- > > Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road, > > Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN > > Registered No: 690597 England Stuart -- Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Thursday, 10 April 2008 19:11:28 UTC