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

Re: help wanted: RDF issue rdfms-assertion

From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 15:19:40 -0400
Cc: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
To: las@olin.edu
Message-Id: <3055121B-7402-11D6-94D0-000393914268@w3.org>

On Wednesday, May 29, 2002, at 05:46 PM, Lynn Andrea Stein wrote:

> Yes, but the difference is that in "normal" parlance terms are defined 
> by communities of practice.  (One can argue about what the community 
> uses a term to mean, or about what community the term was used with 
> respect to, but there's no one definitive source for THE MEANING of the 
> term other than the community.)  In contrast, you have suggested that 
> authority to define the meaning of an RDF predicate IN FACT vests with 
> the owner of the URL.
>

Yes. This is different from the algorithms we use for (for example) the 
meaning of "vegetable" in common parlance.

However, there are some similar cases.  Some terms, such as
line 31 on the US Internal Revenue Service's 2002 1040 form,
have a well-defined authority.
If you want an answer to the semantics of that field, you ask them
because they own the term, they created it.
The same applies to the Michelin star rating on a restaurant,
except you refer to Michelin  rather than the IRS.

The ability of a body to create such terms is very important in fact.

Tim
Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 15:20:22 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:48:16 EDT