home_pw at msn.com
Sat Dec 18 21:04:41 CET 2010
From: foaf-protocols-bounces at lists.foaf-project.org
[mailto:foaf-protocols-bounces at lists.foaf-project.org] On Behalf Of Kingsley
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2010 11:17 AM
To: foaf-protocols at lists.foaf-project.org; Dan Brickley
Subject: Re: [foaf-protocols] EAV
On 12/18/10 1:24 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> On 12/18/10 6:21 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Kingsley Idehen
>> <kidehen at openlinksw.com> wrote:
We exist in a continuum, lets fit
>>> into said continuum and lots of inclusion induced progress will be the
>> Kingsley, you're not making sense. "Resource" is just RDF's technical
>> term for "thing". You're arguing that all things are not things, now?
> I am saying: why have we added a new term where there are other terms
> that people (outside the Semantic Web province) already understand.
> So "Resource" is a "Thing" but "Entity" isn't a "Thing" then?
> So, you want to tell me it makes sense for you to say: Data Item ==
> Resource? vs Data Item == Entity or Object with an Identifier that
> resolves (i.e. functions as a Name) to an actual Resource (data
> container style artifact) that bears/carries its Representation (a
> function of a descriptive graph pictorial where Attribute=Value pairs
> coalesce around Identifier of description Subject) ?
>>> The RDF narrative is wrong and broken.
More information about the foaf-protocols