Re: Extensibility in Syndication formats

[Bill de hÓra <bill@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Dare Obasanjo wrote:

> There are several issues with your example. The first
> is common to all of RDF, using URIs as identifiers is
> ambiguous (another URI permathread coming up).  
>
> If I use RDF:about="http://www.microsoft.com";, am I
> talking about the HTML retrieved by performing an HTTP
> GET of that URL or the actual company Microsoft? 

Just how is this specific to URIs or RDF?


> This goes off into permathread land from here but this
> example should get the point of why using URI as
> identifiers is problematic in RDF. 

What identifiers would you suggest?


> Since RDF isn't
> used much outside closed environments or academic
> circles you don't hear people complain about this
> problem much.   However if RDF ever gained traction on
> the World Wide Web, this would be a significant
> problem. 

In no way is the significance of this problem restricted or specific 
to any technology mentioned in this thread. You argument is vapid.

cheers
Bill