- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 06:51:31 +0300
- To: drew.mcdermott@yale.edu, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
> I believe I am echoing Pat Hayes when I say that I don't understand > why it is considered desirable, let alone essential, let alone > *possible*, that there be only one name for each object. What on > earth could guarantee such a thing? Lasers in space that destroy any > computer found to have a nonofficial URI for an object? You misunderstood me. As did Pat earlier. I never said that a given 'entity' on the SW couldn't be represented by more than one URI. Please re-read my posting. I said that if *two* *different* entities each having distinct serialized identity were *unintentionally* given the same URI in the RDF graph, then that would not be a good thing. I can't possibly imagine why anyone would think otherwise. I think I will refrain from any further postings to the www-rdf-logic list, as it seems I am unnable to communicate clearly enough for anyone to actually follow what I'm saying. I say tomato, folks read potato. And then write pages of arguments about potatos. It seems a waste of time.... Regards, Patrick -- Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 3 356 0209 Senior Research Scientist Mobile: +358 50 483 9453 Software Technology Laboratory Fax: +358 7180 35409 Nokia Research Center Video: +358 3 356 0209 / 4227 Visiokatu 1, 33720 Tampere, Finland Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Thursday, 30 August 2001 23:51:35 UTC