Re: "In Defense of Ambiguity"

Seth:

Seth Russell wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:53 PM, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@uibk.ac.at 
> <mailto:martin.hepp@uibk.ac.at>> wrote:
>
>     the current SW infrastructure requires us to define the meaning of
>     a conceptual element identified by a URI beforehand. 
>
>
> I don't think that is true.   Once the spelling of the URI is defined, 
> people can add statements to the SW using that URI and as they do so 
> its meaning gets fleshed out and even changes.  Just like in natural 
> language.  Who can just declare that it should not work that way?    
> Now certainly some some systems designs will not allow the meaning to 
> change, for example a business may define a specific product using a 
> URI and insist that i never can change; but that is just one 
> application.  The semantic web is bigger than that.  Or is it?
>
You are right, this is possible. However, we have no means of keeping 
track that data using a URI as a reference is aligned with such 
conceptual evolution.

-----------------------------------
martin hepp, http://www.heppnetz.de
mhepp@computer.org, skype mfhepp