On 3 Apr 2005, at 23:02, Thomas Broyer wrote:
Henry Story wrote:Perhaps you mean that they are alternate versions of the representations described by the <urn:uuid:1225...>?
That's it! (I think...)
Now that we agree, I let you use the web-arch to describe it.
Ok. So let us try the slightly clumsy (to be improved later) definition
What about:
[[
The value "alternate" signifies that the IRI in the value of the href attribute identifies a resource whose representations are an alternate version of the representation described by the resource described by the containing element.
]]
<<inline: Atom-related.jpg>>
and let us look at the application of this definition to the example of our graph above.
Here you see that the <urn:uuid:1225...> does not have 1 representation, but two representations: the yellow and the green "<entry>..." representations. One of these
representations (the yellow, older one) had a link to <else.html>, while the other
(the greener, newer one) had a link to <displaced.html>.
So according to your definition the green tom2:alternate arrow (the one that arises
from the information in the green entry) says is that these two yellow and green entry
representations are alternates of the green "<xhtml>..." and "<html>..." representations.
But that is not quite what we want to say, since that would make the older yellow
"<entry>..." representation an alternative of the newer green html and xhtml representations.
These might have changed only a little during the displacement, but they may also have changed
a lot more. This just does not seem quite right.
Now I can hear you think (amazing powers that I have :-) that what you really mean is
that the green entry representation alone (not the older yellow one) is an alternate version
of the representation of the <displaced.html> resource. But if you mean to say that, then
why bring <urn:uuid:1225...> the id of the entry into the picture at all?
Let us just cut it out, since the link construct can indexically refer to the representation
in which it is located.
[[
The value "alternate" signifies that the IRI in the value of the href attribute identifies a resource whose representations are an alternate version of the containing element.
]]
Now I think we have another way of saying what I meant by the A:alternate relation.
Which of the phrasings is better, the one above or
[[
The value "alternate" signifies that the containing element is an alternative
representation of the resource identified by the IRI in the value of the href attribute.
]]
is now a matter of which one is clearer. But I think we are describing the same relation.
Henry Story
