- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 11:29:05 -0400
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Cc: www-talk@w3.org
On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 03:43:08PM +0100, Sean B. Palmer wrote: > > I don't think there's much more to say in this discussion, > > is there? > > Only that if the force of your conviction is that strong, suggesting that > RDF gets along in its own little world but can't interact with machinery > for the wider Web seems like a precursor to a mail to www-rdf-comments to > me :-) The RDF Core WG would certainly want the SW and WWW to be > interoperable, and yet after repeated debates spurred mainly by Aaron, > fragIDs in RDF haven't been deprecated. That speaks volumes. I think that's in large part because the SW tools I've seen have only been superficially integrated with the Web. One of things that I've thought about doing was setting up CWM as a HTTP proxy, and using it to annotate (via headers, initially) any response that I receive, telling me about all known relationships to that resource. I can't do this for all RDF "resources", because the proxy doesn't see the fragment id. I can only use it for those RDF resources that have a URI, not a URI reference. And that's not many of them, unfortunately. MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred) Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. distobj@acm.org http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Thursday, 23 May 2002 11:20:34 UTC