Semantic Web Interest Group IRC Scratchpad

Welcome to the Semantic Web Interest Group scratchpad generated automatically from discussions on IRC at Freenode channel #swig 2001-2018 approx by the chump bot.

Nearby: IRC logs | semantic-web list | W3C Wiki (Recent changes) | delicious swigbot

last updated at 2002-08-09 19:58
bijan: (Recalling, of course, that 'grumpy' is a term of endearment.)
bijan: (Can't quite say the same for 'hypertext/media guy' :))
bijan: More food for thought.
bijan: DanC has a page with similar links.
bijan: "This gives TBL all sorts of grief, but I think that it is inevitable that there will be places where different people use the URI to identify different things. I think the SemWeb architecture has to be strong enough to deal with this, without vanishing into a black hole."
bijan: "I think there's a strong analogy with early hypertext systems, that could not tolerate the potential that link targets might not be there."
sandro: There's a sort of insinuation there (which is completely false) that TBL doesn't approve of 404 or think it's necessary.
bijan: I've seen this analogy before, and it always unsettles me. Jim Hendler has made it in the context of ontologies.
bijan: Did hypertext systems really vanish into a black hole if there was a possibility that link targets wouldn't be there?
sandro: The best plan I've heard is that http:foo#bar identifies the same thing as the symbol "bar" does in the document http:foo. It's not perfect, but it gives us something to hold on to and work from.
bijan: "The Semantic Web has to be able to tolerate the fact that you can't know what a resource is, and thus different parties may not have a shared perception of this, just like the Web needed 404 to work."
sandro: as I've heard TimBL and DanC tell it, yes -- in the sense that no one would attempt to construct a system which did not guarantee link consistency. (call that a black hole if you like)
bijan: I'm not clear on this at all. The problem of missing info and the problem of different (or mis-) understanding are fairly disanalogous.
sandro: The starting foothold is the document at the URIRef's racine (root URI) -- the URIRef means what the author of that document declared it to mean. That still leaves tons of problems, of course.
bijan: Sandro, er...I seem to vaguely recall things like Hypercard prompting me for the "missing" stack.
sandro: The anology is more a social one that a technical one. It's just about a kind of necessary fault tollerance to allow unregulated systems.
bijan: Is there an authoratative example of the link consistency problem? I.e., with documentation to examine?
sandro: Well, hypercard doesn't really count. :-) No, seriously, I don't know the field. Perhaps they're talking about network-distributed hypertext systems.
bijan: Like gopher? What does gopher do?
bijan: TimBL also claims that this isn't a good analogy.
bijan: But in a somewhat fuddy-duddy way :) (E.g., We maintain global uri uniqueness "By specifications, darn it!")
bijan: I remain confused :)
Seth: description: Ideagraph is easy-to-use software for creating visual maps of ideas, that can work
Seth: the dev discussion group is ideagraph-dev
danbri: mentioned in #mozilla. Looks pretty handy.
danbri: Ok, not very RDFish, but I do want to make sure my RDF code is internationally-friendly, and this seems a useful reference / intro.
danbri: aside: Note that the IRC link in this annotation shows up as a usable hyperlink in the web version (thanks Edd, Matt :)
Created by the Daily Chump bot. Hosted by PlanetRDF.