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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] Are URIs Resources? (WAS RE: [xml-dev] Re: Non-infoset)

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Bart Schuller wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 06:37:12PM +0200, Jan Algermissen wrote:
>>and I have never ever had any problems with that decision. I believe 
>>that a technology itself gets to define what their 'elements' are and 
>>not whoever uses the technology.
>>A nice example of this is XTM (Topic Maps applied to XML/Web) which 
>>implicitly makes the assumption that URIs allways identify Documents 
>>(aka 'addressable subjects') and NEVER!! abstract concepts (aka 
>>'non-addressable subjects'). How can a technology (Topic Maps) that 
>>*uses* terms and infrastructure of another technology re-define the 
>>terms? Makes no sense to me.
> It makes no sense because it isn't true. It explicitly *DOES* use URIs
> in precisely these two ways. See for example
> http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/1.0/#def-subject-indicator
> Now from what I've read about RDF it seems that too uses URIs in these
> different ways, but fails to make the distinction, so you can never be
> sure whether a statement talks about a document or about the subject of
> the document.

According to its Model Theory, RDF only 'uses' URIs in one way, as names 
denoting resources. There's no distinction to be had.



News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS