[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