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

Re: [ratholes, reification, risk] poison-URIref testcases

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 12:12:21 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020325121019.00a89c00@joy.songbird.com>
To: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 10:05 AM 3/25/02 +0000, Jan Grant wrote:
>On Mon, 25 Mar 2002, Graham Klyne wrote:
>
> > I would argue that the "meaning" of some RDF is not the "conjunction of the
> > meaning of individual triples".  Conjunction of "meaning" seems to be a
> > meaningless (er, ill-defined) idea.  It is the _truth_ under some
> > interpretation that is a conjunction.
>
>Unfortunately, that bit of the conversation seems to be missing from
>Dan's quoted text.

OK.

>Dan's concern might be summarised as: "...but what if a URI _doesn't_ I
>any R?" :-)

By which I assume you mean have a mapping I(URI) in IR ?

I think the definition of an interpretation requires that such a mapping 
exists (irrespective of whatever may be happen in the "real Web").

#g


-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Monday, 25 March 2002 07:18:06 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:46:22 EDT