[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: URI resolver was Re: RDDL and XML Schemas Proposed Recommendation
- From: John Cowan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Justin Couch <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 10:26:22 -0500
Justin Couch wrote:
>> Things like RDF allow you to make statements "about" resources without
>> needing to resolve the URI.
> Well that is an invalid statement. It is easy to prove it to be false
> because you may say something and then have the resolver tell you it is
> completely different. That is, these can only strictly be limited to a
> collection of hints until an authorative answer is given by actually
> resolving a resource. For example, that URN above, your RDF says that it
> is a comic book. If you resolved it you would find it is a technical
> book about Java network programming.
That means the RDF is wrong, which is orthogonal to its being authoritative.
:-) In any event, though, retrieval (not "resolution" as you call it) is
definitely not a way of finding out authoritative things. If you GET a
certain http: URL, it may return the text/plain entity body
"Mon Mar 26 10:24:17 EST 2001", but there is nothing to say whether your URL
is fetching the current time, or a fixed string, or something else altogether.
RDF *can* provide authoritative information on this point, provided the
RDF is approved by an authority (human).
There is / one art || John Cowan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
no more / no less || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness \\ -- Piet Hein