Dave Reynolds wrote:
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 06:29 -0500, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
One *can* argue that the RDFS spec is definitive, and it is very loose in its
definition.
Loose in the sense of allowing a range of values but as a specification
it is unambiguous in this case, as Martin has already pointed out:
"When such representations may be retrieved, no constraints are placed
on the format of those representations."
I'd suggest that the intended meaning is very ambiguous, primarily
because it uses overloaded terms, the primary question is whether
rdfs:seeAlso points to a resource (in the semweb sense, something named
with a URI) which you are looking for statements about, or whether
rdfs:seeAlso points to a resource (in the restweb sense, something named
with a dereferencable URI giving access to a set of representations when
dereferenced) which generically may have something to do with the subject.
In one case there's a built in expectation of RDF statements, and thus
the meaning of "no constraints are placed on the format of those
representations" is naturally constrained to the set of data formats
which can contain RDF statements - and in the other case it's
interpretation is wide open to conflicting usage as illustrated by this
chain of emails.
Best,
Nathan
