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

Re: problems with concise bounded descriptions

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 08:53:05 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <20041001.085305.20507927.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Subject: RE: problems with concise bounded descriptions
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 14:27:16 +0300

> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ext Dan Brickley [mailto:danbri@w3.org]
> > Sent: 01 October, 2004 13:10
> > To: Stickler Patrick (Nokia-TP-MSW/Tampere)
> > Cc: eric@w3.org; pfps@research.bell-labs.com; www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: problems with concise bounded descriptions

[...]

> > Re 'perfect', http://www.w3.org/Submission/2004/SUBM-CBD-20040930/
> > does say (in the abstact), 
> > 
> > 	This document defines a concise bounded description of 
> > a resource in
> > 	terms of an RDF graph, as an optimal unit of specific 
> > knowledge about
> > 	that resource to be utilized by, and/or interchanged 
> > between, semantic
> > 	web agents.
> > 
> > ...where 'optimal' suggests a certain comfort with the design, on my
> > reading of http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=optimal
> 
> I *do* assert that CBDs are *an* optimal unit of specific knowledge.

OK, you so assert.  Now please tell us which metric you are using to
determine optimially.  

Yes, even with your metric there may be many different optimal units of
specific knowledge and there there may be many different metrics for
defining optimal units of specific knowledge.  However, without knowing
which metric you are using your claim is vacuous - you might be using the
``is closest to my process for determining CBD'' metric for example.

[...]

Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Bell Labs Research
Received on Friday, 1 October 2004 12:47:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:09 GMT