[Fwd: Re: Splitting vs. Interpreting]
|
View:
New views
1 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
 |
[Fwd: Re: Splitting vs. Interpreting]
by Xiaoshu Wang
::
Rate this Message:
Looks to me like you only sent this to me, though it appear to be written as if sent to the list. You may want to try again. Stuart -- Xiaoshu Wang wrote: > Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) wrote: > >>>> Well... http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch is pretty clear in its one and >>>> only diagram that what is obtained from the web are >>>> awww:representation of a resource as opposed to the resource itself. >>>> I think that accords with your position. >>>> >>>> >>> I think possibly there may be a misunderstanding here about the >>> meaning of the phrase "obtained from". If I walk up to the Web, so to >>> speak, and throw a URI at it, then what I get back is (as Stuart says) >>> a representation of something. >>> >>> >> So far so good... >> >> >> >>> But what I managed to make contact >>> with, and what sent me that representation, and which that >>> representation is a(n awww:)representation of, is supposed to be a >>> resource of some (special) kind. >>> >>> >> Still ok... >> "(special)" alluding to 'so-called' "information resource"? >> >> And parenthetically because of controversy over 1) objective charactterisation of such a 'special' kind of resources and 2) whether robust characterisation is actually necssary or possible? >> >> >> >>> And Ive been reading Xaioshu as meaning that that resource, whatever >>> it is, is what is "obtained from" the Web; in which case, his position >>> makes more sense (though I still don't agree with it :-) >>> >>> >> FWIW my reading of Xiaoshu's is that he complains that the TAG holds the position that it takes what is "obtained from" the web (aka. an awww:representation) as being *the* referenced resource, and that that is not a position that the TAG should hold - which is fortunate (maybe) because AFAIK it is not infact a position held by the TAG (or by TR/webarch). >> >> > Stuart's reading of me is correct. But I think Pat's has partial merit > too. What Pat is trying to get is a level of comfort to avoid falling > into the Decartian gap. (I probably have skipped many of my reasoning > steps here). But if we just take the Web to as another *mean* of > obtaining information, then Pat has read me correctly too. What we get > from the Web is no different from what we get from sight, sound, and > touch. the Web is just another information system, but with a larger > scope and easier accessibility. > >> That the awww:representation obtained could be *a* resource is possible. However, the obtained representation is just not (usually, ever?) the resource being referred to in the original reference. >> >> > We could say that for a URI, its resource is somewhat equivalent (but > not *is*) to what the URI denotes. But we have to define the > equivalence. But this definition must be *explicit* and *objective* so > that it must be signaled somewhere. The line of thought that I am > trying to refute is the thought that: there is an intrinsic equivalence > relation between a resource and its representation. But, there is none. > > Xiaoshu > >> I'm still thinking about your book example... particularly >> >> "This entity involved in the this transaction, here and now, is what you are asking >> about; it is the thing that the name you just used refers to". >> >> The physical book seems to serve as both message (awww:representation) and resource. The closest 'electronic' example I can get to is an immutable file/document that has a single invariant representation over its entire lifetime. >> >> FWIW: I think Xiaoshu, you, I and the TAG (at least the one I was part of) hold(held) very similar positions. >> >> >> >>> Pat >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>> IHMC (850)434 8903 or >>> (650)494 3973 >>> 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office >>> Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax >>> FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile >>> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes >>> >>> >> Stuart >> -- >> > > |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
