W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > July 2001

Terminology Help Needed (was: Re: #rdfms-literals-as-resources in scope?)

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:47:52 -0700
Message-Id: <v0421010db773ae38c2f0@[130.107.66.237]>
To: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

[Pat Hayes:]

> >
> > PS. Heres how Ive been translating this debate internally, which may
> > help get the central issues clear.
> > resource  <---->  entity (ie anything at all, anything in the
> > universe or out of it, anything that can possibly be referred to or
> > quantified over; anything that can be conceived of in the mind of
> > Man, God or Tim B-L; the most general category possible.)
> > URI  <------>  name, referring expression
> > literal  <----->  numeral, a special kind of referring expression
> > from which the referent can be computed.
> > [...]

[Sergey Melnik:]

>I think we need a glossary like that at some point! Mine is:
>
>entity (constant) = anything identifiable
>resource (constant) = URI, name, referring expression
>literal (constant) = like yours

OK, the place we are mismatched is, not surprisingly, the 
relationship between "URI" and "resource". I understand "resource" to 
mean a thing; you understand it to mean a name. I think URI's 
*denote* resources; you think resources *are* URIs.  (Others, I 
gather, think that URI's are something like the address of a 
resource.)

We need to get this issue resolved or we will just sink ever deeper 
into terminological quicksand. Since these terms belong to the W3C, 
maybe we can appeal to them for a ruling on this question? Anyone out 
there who claims to know what the answer is??

Pat

---------------------------------------------------------------------
(650)859 6569 w
(650)494 3973 h (until September)
phayes@ai.uwf.edu 
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2001 15:47:55 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:38:09 EDT