On Tue, 30 May 2000, Tim Berners-Lee wrote: [...] > (1) My definition of a resource is that exactly identified by a URI and so > URIs and resources are in 1:1 mapping. [...] Tim, Can you motivate our interest in your definition of 'resource'? For example, do you believe it to be the same as that used in RFC-2396[1] or the RDF data model?[2], a clarification of either or both of these, or a proposal for a more useful concept to use instead? Should we think of the 1:1 view as an alternative to these specs or an interpretation of them? RFC-2396 says: In many cases, different URI strings may actually identify the identical resource. This seems contrary to what you're saying in your version of resource, ie. many:1 not 1:1 mapping from URI to 'resource'. RDF M&S seems to defer to this: All things being described by RDF expressions are called resources. [...] Resources are always named by URIs plus optional anchor ids (see [URI]). Anything can have a URI; the extensibility of URIs allows the introduction of identifiers for any entity imaginable. thanks, Dan [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/Received on Wednesday, 31 May 2000 09:34:23 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:43 UTC