Re: [pedantic-web] Re: The OWL Ontology URI

On Thu, 2010-05-13 at 16:08 -0500, Pat Hayes wrote:
> [ . . . ] Another [view], which might be called Boothianism, was that  
> when it comes to reference and denotation, URIs just are ambiguous and  
> hostage to interpretation, 

Yes, but only hostage to interpretation *within* the bounds of their URI
declarations.

> and that the only way to establish what it  
> is that they denote (as opposed to "identify") is to say enough RDF to  
> nail down their intended meanings adequately. 

Yes, by URI declarations.

> This view has a weight  
> of theory behind it, but it has the embarrassing consequence that  
> someone has to write enough RDF about every extant website to fix the  
> appropriate denotation of all the URIs that resolve to it, before the  
> SWeb can get itself kind of connected to the pre-S Web. 

But for existing websites there's no need to write all that RDF
explicitly, because the httpRange-14 rule takes care of it for you.  The
httpRange-14 rule licenses an *implied* URI declaration: if a web site
returns a 200 response for a URI, then that URI effectively has an
implied URI declaration saying that the URI denotes an
w:InformationResource.  The inference rule is something like this:
http://esw.w3.org/AwwswDboothsRules 

  # httpRange-14 rule: 200 response => InformationResource
  # http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005Jun/0039.html
  {       ?r uri:hasURI ?u .
  ?u http:hasGetReply ?reply .
  ?reply http:hasStatusCode 200 .
  } => {     
  ?r a awww:InformationResource .
 } .

Stated in terms of URI declarations, the httpRange-14 rule would look
something like this:

  {     
        ?r log:uri ?u .
        ?u http:hasDirectGetReply ?reply .
        ?reply http:hasStatusCode 200 .
        ?formula = {
                   ?r a awww:InformationResource .
                   ?r uri:hasURI ?u .
                   } .
  } => {
        ?u decl:hasDeclaration ?formula .
        } .



-- 
David Booth, Ph.D.
Cleveland Clinic (contractor)

Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect those of Cleveland Clinic.

Received on Friday, 14 May 2010 02:21:22 UTC