Re: [rest-discuss] Re: Relationship between HTTP and RDF/OWL
- Quoting "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@...>:
> > Yes. I'm of the opinion that the main reason we use the word "resource"Correct in a spec or a paper, but correct in a tutorial?
> > rather than the word "thing" is that using the former makes us seem a
> > bit smarter than if we use the latter. However the nuances of "thing"
> > are probably more apposite than the nuances of "resource".
> We use the term resource because "thing" includes those that have yet
> to be named or described, and thus cannot be individually considered
> a resource by any system.
To many people "Resource" implies ownership and belonging. To many others
"Resource" implies membership of some sort of category. Hence we frequently get
discussion of how <http://example.net/Ireland> could or could not be the same
resource as <http://example.org/Ireland> when the former is "owned" by
example.net and the latter by example.org and talk of REST resources vs. RDF
resources vs. OWL resources vs. DAML resources.
Since generally people don't try to say anything about things they don't have an
identifier for I think "thing" has it's place in non-normative descriptions of
resources (unless there are further ways in which thing is wrong).
" it has been truly said that hackers have even more words for
equipment failures than Yiddish has for obnoxious people." - jargon.txt