- From: Bill dehOra <Wdehora@cromwellmedia.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 16:13:39 +0100
- To: "'John Cowan'" <cowan@locke.ccil.org>
- Cc: xml-uri@w3.org
:Of course I can't. But accessing is not the only operation that :exists on the Web, particularly the semantic Web. I can write :perfectly correct metadata, thus: : :<rdf:Description about= : :"brick://us/ny/nyc/13%20%E.%203rd%20St.?side=east&course=11&seq=25"> : <color>red</color> :</rdf:Description> That's true, there is much to be stated for making statements about resources as opposed to making resources of them. As for color being a property (datum) of a brick, I'm aginnit, 'cos that might imply that different bricks that are red have the same color (or even that they are red). Maybe RDF2 will have built in tropes and metamers :-). Point taken nonetheless. Actually while we're on it, any thoughts about the synchronisation of the description and the the thing itself? The brick moves, or is painted, or is replaced (or I nicked it ;-). Then the metadata or description is out of the sync with the facts that are the case with the brick. I've heard it touted as particular problem with RDF, but maybe it's a feature of indirection inside computers that we have to live and thread carefully with, as opposed to a flaw in resource/thing systems themselves. :No, I think in the above case that I am providing a datum :about *the brick*,not about some representation of it. I'll concede that: differentiating between the sense data of a thing would be argument for arguments sake. -Bill
Received on Wednesday, 24 May 2000 11:12:13 UTC