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

RE: #rdfms-literals-as-resources in scope?

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 13:33:22 -0700
Message-Id: <v04210110b773b9586028@[130.107.66.237]>
To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>At 11:46 AM 7/10/01 -0700, pat hayes wrote:
>>PS. There is a problem with saying that something is a different 
>>kind of thing when it is named by a URI; this means that a thing's 
>>ontological status changes when someone invents a name. So a 
>>certain star in a distant galalaxy might suddenly become a resource 
>>just because some astronomer in China puts up something on a 
>>website. I guess I find this uncomfortable.
>
>Is this a problem if it still retains all of the other properties it 
>had before it was named?   Would that make a Resource a subset of 
>things-with-or-without-URI's?

Actually I am beginning to wonder myself why I was uncomfortable with 
the notion. Any interpretation will need to 'choose' some universe, 
and of course that has to include everything that is named (so that 
the name has something to denote) but it neednt include everything 
there 'really' is, so as long as we allow that there *may* be some 
unnamed things in the universe, I guess my worry goes away (or can be 
safely relegated to the realms of metaphysical worries.)

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 16:33:26 EDT

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