RE: Axiom: Opacity of URIs

Ian,

Oh, I didn't know that.  Then there shouldn't be any worries about using two
URIs for the English "pain" and French "pain", right? 

Xiaoshu 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: semantic-web-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:semantic-web-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ian Emmons
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 1:23 PM
> To: semantic-web@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Axiom: Opacity of URIs
> 
> Xiaoshu,
> 
> In English "pain" means suffering or distress.  However, in 
> French the four-letter sequence "pain" is the word for bread.
> 
> -Ian
> 
> -------- Original Message  --------
> From: "Xiaoshu Wang" <wangxiao@musc.edu>
> To: rreck@rrecktek.com, semantic-web@w3.org
> Subject: Re:Axiom: Opacity of URIs
> Date: 1/8/2007 10:07 AM
> 
> > Ronald,
> > 
> >> I run into the same situation when I want to manage 
> definitions for 
> >> words from multiple communities of interest.
> >> The word "frequency" has slightly different meanings in 
> the domain of 
> >> mathematics, physics or signal processing. Again, it is 
> attractive to 
> >> have derivable URI's.
> > 
> > Here is my two cents on it.
> > 
> > I think they - English/French expression of pain vs. different 
> > meanings of the word "frequency" - are two different situiations.  
> > IMHO, one concept should be assigned with one URI.  Pain is 
> "pain", it 
> > does not matter how you yell it out.  So, in this case 
> there should be 
> > ONE URI for that concept.  On the other hand, if two 
> "frequencies" has 
> > different meanings, there should be TWO URIs for expressing them.
> >
> > Xiaoshu
> 
>

Received on Monday, 8 January 2007 18:50:10 UTC