Hello Les,
First, thank you for having read the contribution! Unfortunately I'm
probably not the best person which can answer your question, as I'm not
an expert of XRI2.0. I limited to develop my contribution in the scope of
the current proposal
(
http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/XriThree/GcsDelimiter), which, I
personally support for one specific reason:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xri/200811/msg00043.html.
I think Drummond's reply
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xdi/200811/msg00031.html is a
good technical explanation of this, expecially the last statement: in
an ordered set, you are not referencing across contexts. The context is
the ordered set itself. For example, in $sig$d, the context for $d is
$sig. Which I understand as follow: put an object inside a context is
not exactly the same as referencing it from that context).
The core of this issue - that's my guess and not a technical explanation
- is probably that XRI2.0 did not consider the need to "put an
instance of an object inside a context", but just to
"cross reference" it. That is instead a fundamental capability
for XDI (and for any human or machine understandable language).
I'll be happy to answer any further questions you might have on the
contents of the contribution itself.
Kind Regards,
Giovanni
At 13.36 25/11/2008, Chasen, Les wrote:
Hi Giovanni. I had a
chance to read this. While I like what you guys
are doing with link contracts I fail to understand why all of these
examples do not work with XRI 2.0 style cross references.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Giovanni Bartolomeo
[
mailto:]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 12:02 PM
> To: XDI
> Subject: [xdi] on global cross references and the link contract
use
> case
>
> Hello,
>
> some weeks ago I mentioned that I was playing a bit with the
> semantics of link contracts. Better to say, with the global
cross
> references applied to the link contract use case. After the issue
of
> XDI RDF model v.11, I put my thoughts in a document which you can
find
> below.
> Maybe just semantic nuances, but your comments will be welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Giovanni
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG -
http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.10/1811 - Release Date:
25/11/2008 8.29
