W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > January 2002

Re: what RDF is not (was ...)

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 11:07:44 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200201041607.LAA12343@markbaker.ca>
To: pfps@research.bell-labs.com (Peter F. Patel-Schneider)
Cc: msabin@interx.com, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> > For example, here's some possible URIs for some transcendentals;
> > 
> > http://numbers.example.org/transcendental/pi
> > http://numbers.example.org/transcendental/e
> 
> Sure, but there are only countably many of such URIs, so not all reals can
> have such indentifiers.

Not being countable means not being able to prescribe a naming structure
a priori, that's all.  In other (seemingly convoluted) words;

  Not all real numbers have URIs, but any real number can have a URI.

(because "any" implies that identity has been determined)

Hmm, I can tell below that are you making an invalid assumption.  You
are assuming that we're restricted to identifying reals with a URI
structure such as;

  http://math.org/number/[put some expansion of number here]

That's not the case at all.

[snip]
> This real number is different from all the real numbers represented by
> URIs.

Ok, so I'll identify it as;

http://example.org/numbers/real/peters-example-real

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Friday, 4 January 2002 11:07:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:52 GMT