Lists Home |
Date Index |
> whenever you point to a resource, you specify whether you are pointing
> the *resource itself* (thus "http://www.w3.org", considered as a
> to a resource, means "the home page of the W3C"), or you are using the
> resource to designate something else by convention, a so-called
> indicating reference" (thus "http://www.w3.org", considered as a
> indicator, might mean "the W3C").
This is similar to the facility in RDF. If I use as subject:
http://www.w3.org qualityIs good
I mean the web page
But if I use something like
http://www.w3.org ownerIs _:anon1
_:anon1 qualityIs good
I am talking about the W3C
(the plain English for this is "The owner of http://www.w3.org has good
This is why it is so critical that people not be encouraged to say that
http://www.w3.org IS the W3C. Because first, you already have a way to
indirectly identify the W3C, by saying "the owner of http://www.w3.org".
And if you start saying that http://www.w3.org IS the W3C, things that
are perfectly reasonable and logical before such as "the owner of
http://www.w3.org" become muddled and suspicious.