Lists Home |
Date Index |
> From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:email@example.com]
> So if the Public ID is used
> in RDF for the Semantic Web, where does uniqueness
> get conferred?
See tag: URIs for one approach. The scheme itself doesn't confer
uniqueness. You can replace each http: with urn:. Uniqueness wrt to
domain names (excluding the odd IP address and lawsuit), is conferred by
ICANN I think.
> 1. What is the one thing that it identifies
> for URIs?
That depends on what the RDF MT calls an 'interpretation'. An
interpretation assigns a thing to a name (or vice versa).
> 2. Are these resources (can only be one) or
> representations (can vary)?
That's not quite the right distinction; resource have URIs,
representations can have URIs,; that might get confusing, on the other
hand asking for the representation of a representations seems like a
corner case (you could use data: URIs there). In one sense
representations are second class citizens on the Web, but they are very
much the raw material the Web machinery processes; it's a bit dissonant,
but it works. Pay no attention to that resource behind the curtain. On
the Web there is only The Great And Powerful Oz.
> I'm trying to understand if this is a real
> problem (needs a constant; used a variable)
It's only a problem for the RDF machinery that will be the semantic web.
Ideally you disambiguate before you let RDF loose on the URIs. RDF MT
specifically compares URIs to logical constants.
Bill de hÓra