W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > January 2002

Re: use/mention and reification

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 19:40:06 -0500
Message-ID: <3C4F57E6.6010107@mitre.org>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
CC: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, ext Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@mimesweeper.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Dan Brickley wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Frank Manola wrote:
> 
> 
>>Patrick Stickler wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On 2002-01-23 17:42, "ext Frank Manola" <fmanola@mitre.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>...
>>>>
>>>>2.  If two people use different non-URIs, like "Superman" and "Clark
>>>>Kent", to refer to (apparently) different things, the same thing holds.
>>>>We know they've used different names, but we may still infer they are
>>>>talking about the same thing if we get enough additional information.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>The same "thing" in the universe, yes, but not the same RDF resource.
>>>We wouldn't want all nodes with Superman and ClarkKent URIs to
>>>be merged, even if we determine that they denote the same "thing".
>>>
>>
>>If we really determined that they truly denote the same "thing", we
>>certainly would like to try! There are many highly practical examples
>>where you'd want to get rid of one of the identifiers and agree to use
>>the other.  The situation here, though, is Superman and ClarkKent URIs
>>don't, strictly speaking, denote the same thing [...].
>>
> 
> In which case, the example has drifted somewhat from my original intent,
> which was based on their being two names for one thing-in-the-world, ie.
> some wierd guy who's kinda strong, sometimes wears glasses and sometimes
> wears a blue and red leotard.
> 
> The point isn't that "lois's idea of superman" and "lois's idea of clark"
> are distinct entities worthy of our concern. I was trying to make a much
> more mundane and (I'd hoped) less woolly point. Lois lacks complete
> information about the name-to-world mappings. Her views, messages, diary
> entries and (we ought to steer clear of this) mental states will all be
> affected by her lack of the 'complete picture'. On the Web, we have a
> similar situation: no one document or agent has the whole story. Often
> they're wrong, or lack information. The partial information aspect of this
> is my main concern: if *everyone* had faultless access to the meaning of
> each and every URI name, I wouldn't have my current concerns about
> reification.
> 
> Dan


I agree 100%, which I guess means I didn't understand something about 
your original point.  Specifically, what does quoting the URIs in 
reification have to do with addressing this?

--Frank




-- 
Frank Manola                   The MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road, MS A345   Bedford, MA 01730-1420
mailto:fmanola@mitre.org       voice: 781-271-8147   FAX: 781-271-875
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2002 19:32:30 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:43:58 EDT