W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > May 2003

Re: Standard URI Set, and Resource Description Protocol (rdp://)

From: Kevin Smathers <kevin.smathers@hp.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 12:11:43 -0700
Message-ID: <3ECBCF6F.8020505@hp.com>
To: Sherman Monroe <shermanmonroe@yahoo.com>
Cc: Jon Hanna <jon@spin.ie>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Jon was asking how to find the URI, not how to define it. 

My suggestion would be to search a pychological dictionary (built on top 
of Sherman's URIs) for terms related to anxiety. Since Sherman isn't 
tackling literals, we can assume that 'anxiety' is just listed literally 
in the dictionary.  The URIs that relate the literal 'anxiety' to 
specific anxious conditions that refine the basic idea would presumably 
be based on some ontology that Sherman had taken from elsewhere and 
1,$s/http:/rdp:/g. Follow the right relationship, verify it by following 
a class or type relationship and verifying that you are talking about a 
state of mind, and voila, you've found the URI for your condition.

Cheers,
-kls

Sherman Monroe wrote:

> The answer to this question is related to linguistics. The lexicon is 
> created actively by the brain. The brain indexes the objects it 
> encounters throught the senses, and assigns them all "symbols" which 
> can be used to /re/-present the object. In this sense, the symbol 
> "stands for" the object.
>  
> The concepts for which symobls have been provided are, again, 
> selectively chosen. These are generally concrete objects that can be 
> physically observed and sensed. Language developed to allow the 
> transimission of "assertions" about these objects. As the language 
> grows more complex, the more assertions are available for representation.
>  
> RDF URI's are like the vocabulary for the semantic web language. The 
> very nature of a natural language "vocabulary" limits it to describing 
> only discreet objects and concepts, as there are natural limits to the 
> indexing capacity of the brain. But a machine vocabulary could in 
> theory contain a "term" that re-presents each assertion, as assertions 
> are themselves concepts. Reification, for example, provides a way of 
> assigning a term for these complex concepts.
>  
> As for your example, you would first have to represented it as an RDF 
> model, using availiable ontologies for expressing complex concepts. 
> Then, if you wanted to assign a URI to express or re-present that 
> complex concept, I suggest you reify it.
>
>  
> -sherman
>
> */Jon Hanna <jon@spin.ie>/* wrote:
>
>
>     I'd have quite a few questions about this. My first though would
>     be how do I
>     find out the URI for the ominous feeling when you can't think of
>     anything
>     you need to do, but something at the back of your mind tells you
>     that there
>     is something really important you should do as a matter of urgency?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search 
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/search/mailsig/*http://search.yahoo.com> - 
> Faster. Easier. Bingo. 



-- 
========================================================
   Kevin Smathers                kevin.smathers@hp.com    
   Hewlett-Packard               kevin@ank.com            
   Palo Alto Research Lab                                 
   1501 Page Mill Rd.            650-857-4477 work        
   M/S 1135                      650-852-8186 fax         
   Palo Alto, CA 94304           510-247-1031 home        
========================================================
use "Standard::Disclaimer";
carp("This message was printed on 100% recycled bits.");
Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2003 15:16:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:59 GMT