OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

tm-pubsubj message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Subject: Re: [tm-pubsubj] Subject Indicator and Subject Indicator Reference(again)


> * Bernard Vatant
> | I am not sure the problem of terminology is about URIs themselves.
> | W3C notes on URIs don't say much on *subjects* represented by
> | resources addressed through their URIs,

Lars Marius
> Whoops. Your terminology use clashes here. Subjects, in topic map
> terms, and resources, in IETF terms, are synonymous.

Are they really? ... hope this will not open another neverending thread :))
I agree that *in principle* the general notion of resource is close to the TM notion of
subject, but is it as general? Is there any IETF or W3C document giving a clear-cut
general definition of "resource"?
"Notion of individual freedom according to Kant" can definitely be a subject in topic map
terms. Is it a resource in IETF terms? Not sure about it.

Anyway you're right, I've stuffed too many controversial words in a single sentence, and
should have written "addressable resources" to be clear.

> | <quote>
> | 3 - Additional URI Issues (...)
> | The use of URIs as identifiers that don't actually identify network resources (for
example
> | they identify an abstract object such as an XML schema, or a physical object such as a
> | book or even a person).
> | </quote>
> |
> | How is the fact that this is an "issue" to be interpreted?
>
> I would say that it means that the responsible people have identified
> this as an unsolved problem, and that while they want to solve it they
> do not yet know how.

Agreed. And are not we ploughing the way towards some kind of solution?

> | The note is using the term "identify". Why can't we call simply the
> | URI used by/for/in <subjectIndicatorRef> the *subject identifier*?
>
> I have been thinking along the same lines and must say I like the
> idea. It empasizes that fact that it's the SIR actually identifies the
> subject (to software), it is shorter and easier in use than SIR, and
> it makes good sense.

Glad we are tuned on that.

> | 2. It's declared under <subjectIdentity>, so it's clearly an
> | identifier.
>
> Eh, no. It's clearly part of the machinery used to determine the
> identity of the topic's subject, but that's all.

So what is an identifier for you?

> | It is that URI that will be used by TM engines to infere that two
> | topics have the same identity.
>
> Exactly!
>
> | -- The URI used as "subject identifier" identifies the subject by a
> | proxy resource, which is the "subject indicator".
>
> Hmmm. I am not entirely at ease with this phrase. I need to think
> about it.

The wording is not the best, I acknowledge. What I meant is that if we have to choose
something to identify the subject, in a way consistent with the TM notion of what a
subject is, by a *character string* - and that is my notion of an identifier - what could
it be except this URI, which is really what TM authors, TM engines, and Publishers will
all use ...

Bernard




[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Powered by eList eXpress LLC