- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 06:54:50 +0100
- To: <wangxiao@musc.edu>, <eran@hueniverse.com>
- CC: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, <jar@creativecommons.org>, <connolly@w3.org>, <www-tag@w3.org>
On 2009-02-25 07:38, "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com> wrote: >> >> What is required is to define Content-Type in URI. Once we have these, >> not only Data/Resource are linked but DataType/Service. The best of >> all, it works within the conceptualizations defined in AWWW, and does >> not require any other ambiguous conceptualization, such as, IR, >> metadata, and description, etc. > > I consider on of the strengths of the semantic web layer is that it is > agnostic about the syntactic structure of URIs. I also think that > syntactically binding the URI of a resource and the URI(s) of its > representation(s) or description(s) is necessary, and would be overly > cumbersome in practice. Oops. Meant "is *UN*necessary" (hopefully that was obvious ;-) Patrick
Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2009 05:52:55 UTC