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

Re: Meaning of URIRefs (No Ancient Philosophical Disputes!)

From: m batsis <mbatsis@netsmart.gr>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 19:38:49 +0300
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, phayes@ai.uwf.edu, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-Id: <200210261825.02826.mbatsis@netsmart.gr>

On Saturday 26 October 2002 00:04, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> One of the most
> unfortunate ramifications is that term-reusers have to accept all the
> assertions in the "definition" whether they are "definitional" or not,
> because we can't really distinguish between the two.

...in our use of human language; it comes so natural that we don't need to. We 
use indirect meaning all the time though. The point here is, do we want to at 
least distinguish whether x is mentioned as an indirection (whatever that 
means)? May become usefull at some point. Plus the distinction will allow an 
application to ignore these rules if it wishes anyway.

Cheers,

Manos
Received on Saturday, 26 October 2002 12:33:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:56 GMT