- From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 16:21:39 +0100
- To: Kal Ahmed <kal@techquila.com>
- Cc: "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>, "'public-esw@w3.org'" <public-esw@w3.org>
At 10:08 23/04/04 +0100, Kal Ahmed wrote: >I would prefer to say that the described thing is the abstract concept of >Dog (Dog-ness ?) because the word "class" can be misinterpreted as meaning >the OWL class Dog, for example. But I think you understood me correctly. [ref. "dog-ness"...] I'm reminded of a piece by Quine [1] - his base example is "rabbit", and he comes up with terms like "rabbithood" and "rabbiteth" to illustrate the linguistic challenges of determining what is indicated. #g -- [1] W. V. Quine, "Speaking of Objects", in "Ontological Relativity and Other Essays" ------------ Graham Klyne For email: http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Friday, 23 April 2004 11:46:20 UTC