Simon say:
> Following this logic, "identifier" is completely redundant as a qualifier
> (the value of (Agent) is *always* an identifier ...),
No. The value of the Agent is not "an identifier" but
"...identifies the Agent". These are different things.
The Agent WG came up with a number of ways (qualifiers) to do
the latter [1] - one of which is called "identifier" - but you
are better off if you read the definition of the qualifier rather
than the label. We may like to change "identifier" to "reference".
[1] http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/dc-agents/files/wd-agent-qual.html
Cheers...Renato <http://purl.net/net/renato>
Principal Research Scientist, DSTC <http://www.dstc.edu.au>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|