- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:12:34 -0400
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- Cc: Graham Klyne <GK-lists@ninebynine.org>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjekje@ifi.uio.no>, SW-forum Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 16:09 +0000, Nathan wrote: > David Booth wrote: [ . . . ] > > On the other hand, a different application using the same URI in a > > different RDF graph, and attempting to prove that the object is a TV or > > a shoe may not be able to do so if all the information it has about the > > object is: > > > > <http://example/vxb24#a37f> :color "black" . > > > > I.e., for the second application, that same URI is ambiguous. > > Which is ambiguous, the URI or that specific description? the > application may well have followed it's nose there, or may have many > other statements about that URI to consider already. What that URI denotes in an RDF graph is ambiguous to the application using it. In other words, given an RDF graph, an application that needs to distinguish between two resources is unable to determine which of those resources the URI denotes. -- David Booth, Ph.D. http://dbooth.org/ Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of his employer.
Received on Monday, 21 March 2011 20:13:10 UTC