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

Re: Hammer vs. tweezers

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 17:32:58 -0500
Message-Id: <v04210117b756d44381c1@[]>
To: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com wrote:
> > > The set of statements that are subject
> > > of semantic interpretation can be selected in an unspecified,
> > > application-specific way.
> >
> > I'm trying to understand what you mean and I'm struggling
> > with that last sentence. No matter how many times I
> > read it, I'm not understanding it.
> > It's in particular that
> >   set of statements
> >   subject
> >   semantic interpretation
> >   unspecified selection
> > So what does that last sentence actually mean?
>Let me give an example. We expect to find RDF statements on many
>webpages and in many online data sources. Specific applications
>typically consider only a subset of all available data (e.g. certain
>domain, certain set of trusted servers, certain vocabularies, etc.) I
>was trying to convey the idea that meaningful semantics exists only for
>such limited datasets, whose boundaries are determined in a particular
>application context. It probably would be inappropriate to refer to the
>set of all webpages on public servers when say defining the semantics of

You guys at db.stanford really do all think alike, don't you? :-)

While I agree with your overall theme here, it seems to go beyond the 
remit of RDFcore, as it requires a basic change to the language.

However, what you say about semantics isnt exactly right. After all, 
one *can* give a model theory for FOL, which is about as global in 
scope as one could imagine (way larger than the mere Web, for 


IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2001 18:33:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:49 UTC