Re: Future of meta-indices: site indexing proposal and Perl script
Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@ptpc00.cern.ch> Thu, 24 March 1994 18:36 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12301; 24 Mar 94 13:36 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12297; 24 Mar 94 13:36 EST
Received: from mocha.bunyip.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14119; 24 Mar 94 13:36 EST
Received: by mocha.bunyip.com (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2b/CC-Guru-2b) id AA15897 on Thu, 24 Mar 94 11:34:12 -0500
Received: from dxmint.cern.ch by mocha.bunyip.com with SMTP (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2b/CC-Guru-2b) id AA15893 (mail destined for /usr/lib/sendmail -odq -oi -furi-request uri-out) on Thu, 24 Mar 94 11:34:05 -0500
Received: from ptpc00.cern.ch by dxmint.cern.ch (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA15305; Thu, 24 Mar 1994 17:34:00 +0100
Received: by ptpc00.cern.ch (NX5.67d/NX3.0S) id AA14779; Thu, 24 Mar 94 17:36:21 +0100
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 1994 17:36:21 +0100
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@ptpc00.cern.ch>
Message-Id: <9403241636.AA14779@ptpc00.cern.ch>
Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.95)
Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.95)
To: rst@ai.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Future of meta-indices: site indexing proposal and Perl script
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>, uri@bunyip.com
Reply-To: timbl@www0.cern.ch
> > Date: Tue, 22 Mar 1994 17:41:08 --100 from rst@ai.mit.edu > How about: > > <meta name="Summary" > value="MIT AI lab events, including seminars, conferences, and tours"> This suggestion (on www-talk@info.cern.ch) happens to overlap with an SGML suggestion on uri@bunyip.com, in a discussion of URC (Universal Resource Citations, aka Metainformation?). so I cross-post. Another possibility is to use <meta name="summary"> MIT AI lab events, including seminars, conferences, and tours </meta> which has the advantage that it can be nested: <meta name="author"> <meta name="name">Jane Doe</meta> <meta name="email">jd@weird.com</meta> <meta name="urn">/people/1967/us/va/12437234hgj3246h</meta> </meta> and is equivalnt to the LISP which was also proposed on the uri list. This way of using SGML gets around the necessity to write a DTD every time a new fieled name crops up somewhere, but has the disadvantage that you can't check it using an SGML parser (So what? I hear you say). I am comparing it here with <author> <name>Jane Doe</name> <email>jd@weird.com</memail> <urn>/people/1967/us/va/12437234hgj3246h</urn> </author> Perhaps it would be useful to distinguish between two semantics: 1. A noun clause for the object which has properties urn=sdfgwkedf, height=1237123, fsize=9.5 2. A *statement* that the object define by urn=sdfhjsdf has properites height=1237123, fsize=9.5 The URC discussion is only considering point 1, but I wonder whether in fact the information is in fact more of the form of point 2. <ramble> Maybe we need a more mathematical expression For the book x such that x.isbn = 1231231232 I assert that { x.price = $23; x.author= y such that { y.name="fred" } } [A x . isbn(x)=12378097 E edition e . format(e,x) & back(e)=hard & price(e)=$12 Where "A" and "E" should be rotated through 180 degrees of course (-: ] Rambling into SGML: <forall id=x> <suchthat> <meta idref=x name="name">John Doe</meta> </suchthat> <assert> <meta idef=x name="state">ficticious</meta> </assert> </forall> This is, of course, ridiculous, but there is a serious point in it,especially for systems which store meta information as retrieval hints. </ramble> timbl
- Re: Future of meta-indices: site indexing proposa… Tim Berners-Lee