W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > August 2004

Re: InverseFunctional properties are the new URI?

From: Lisa Seeman <lisa@ubaccess.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 14:55:18 +0200
Message-ID: <01d001c47959$214dbed0$f82d000a@IBMA4E63BE0B9E>
To: "John Black" <JohnBlack@deltek.com>, "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>
Cc: "Graham Klyne" <GK@ninebynine.org>, "Damian Steer" <damian.steer@hp.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>


> > Essentially this is the same problem as agreeing on what any
> > new term means -

This is a late night email, so it may just be a good idea at the time thing.

I think (but am not sure) that to enter a new definition or a word into the
Oxford dictionary you need to simply prove its usage in three independent
places.

In other words usage creates a definition.

theoretically we could go for that approach, were an otology has associated
usage examples, (perhaps we can make an ontology for documenting and
referencing usages of ontology - if there isn't one) and when enough usages
are similar enough - we have a legitimate way of using a term.
I am not at all sure we would want to do  and end up in the same mess as
natural language.

However  when referencing/ using a term one could also require referencing
the usage associated with it. in the absence of the definition of usage we
would be talking about primary usage only. Something like what i am
suggesting for WCAG

http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/natural-lang-20030326.html


good night
Lisa
Received on Tuesday, 3 August 2004 08:57:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:57 UTC