Re: Coordination with RDF Core

From: Frank van Harmelen (
Date: 07/09/01

pat hayes wrote:

> I would like to see the 'URI' point retained in the document. The
> more the coreWG gets its node rubbed in this issue, the better :-)

The URI point from Peter's notes stated:

>  - what is a URI? - syntax and semantics

URI syntax is specified in by Tim et al.
so I don't really see the substance of that part of the complaint.
(The RFC describes the syntax that is common to all URI schemes,
and the scheme-specific details of the syntax are/should be specified 
in other places, seems reasonable to me).

Concering semantics, the same document says:
"A Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) is a compact string of characters
   for identifying an abstract or physical resource."

I've always understood that URI's are simply globally unique names,
(which I think is pretty much what Tim's RFC says). In terms of our model-theoretic semantics, are URI's not simply the elements of AD, and that's it? 

So I felt unsure as to what really the substance of Peter's point was.
I also reread much of the discussion on URI's on rdf-logic, back in April
(starting from
but I found the whole discussion rather unilluminating (then, and now again), mostly by folks suffering from a severe case of use\mention confusion.  

Pat, can you expand on what exactly the coreWG should get its nose rubbed into?


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST