Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Hi Jonathan, Jonathan said: I think what is needed is some way to integrate the semantics associated with a URI as provided by REST vs. that associated with RDF. Once that has been done -- it hasn't yet -- we will have a real foundation for the "Semantic Web". Didier replies: Yes!!! Jonathan said: In the meantime it might be confusing to people that there might be _different ways_ to associate semantics with a URI. This is true. Given two methods, they _might_ disagree. So it remains up to the "owner" of the URI not to be contradictory. In any case if the owner of a URI is contradictory -- by whatever mechanism or mechanisms the contradictions arise -- we have no way to make sense of what such a URI "means". Contradictions are logically false, and unresolved contradictions in the meaning of a URI, means that the URI has no meaning. That might be true of a namespace name, or a URI used to for any other purpose. Didier replies: Exactly. This is why we have to push hard and tirelessly to get this spec fixed and made coherent with the vision of the semantic web. Cheers Didier PH Martin
|
