[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [xri] [Fwd: Re: Clarifying what a URL identifies (Four Uses of a URL)]
This prompts me to raise an issue, which i think is incompletely addressed with laisons to other standards bodies: I think we need formal language (in the requirements draft) which ecourages the research into complimentary and conflicting resource expression methodologies. Having said that, todays mention of outside entities questioning the need/benefits for this TCs output (which drives clarification in the requirements draft), goes a long way to this end. Clear articulation of the gaps in current resource identifier notations should be included in the introduction. The W3C TAG, in particular, is likely to keep a scepticle eye, until these shortcommings are well laid out. --- peterd -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Clarifying what a URL identifies (Four Uses of a URL) Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 06:42:20 -0500 (EST) Resent-From: www-tag@w3.org Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 11:17:48 +0000 From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org> To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org> CC: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org References: <200301212127.h0LLRNA15108@wadimousa.hawke.org> At 10:02 PM 1/22/03 -0500, Tim Berners-Lee wrote: >One *can* introduce a new system with a different design >and argue its merits. Sandro has designed an alternative >system http://www.w3.org/2002/12/rdf-identifiers/ >which seems consistent and I haven't finished thinking >about - there are things I like about it and things I don't. >But it does address all the questions, I think. FWIW, I think Sandro's proposal is consistent with the current state of RDF specification, and other views of URIs that have been expressed here, except maybe the view that http: URIs (without fragments) should always denote documents (I hope I don't misinterpret). My point of divergence with that proposal is the suggestion it should be part of the RDF core, because I don't see the necessity for it to be there. The formal semantics for RDF does tell us one thing, though: in a given interpretation of an RDF graph (document, or collection of documents considered together), a given URI must always denote the same single thing. So we can't have a graph in which a URI sometimes denotes a car and elsewhere simultaneously denotes a picture. #g ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org> -- --- peterd Sr Security Architect Neustar, Inc. smtp: peter.davis@neustar.biz (571) 434 5516 jabber: peter.davis@checkov.neustarlab.biz <Quote type="random"> The pursuit of perfection often impedes improvement. <Author>George F. Will</Author> </Quote> PGP Fingerprint: 8994 8774 B682 3A04 B304 C4A2 D9DD 7E5B 8AAC 2D00
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC