W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > February 2001

Re: universal languages

From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:22:34 -0500
Message-ID: <022b01c0907a$8abe96d0$0a2e249b@nemc.org>
To: "Peter Crowther" <Peter.Crowther@melandra.com>
Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Peter Crowther wrote:


> > From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:jborden@mediaone.net]
> [...]
> > > >"Boston" is not
> > > >a URI, and neither is "4,367".
> >
> > Your name, "Boston" and "4,367"  each have an unlimited
> > number of URIs e.g.
> >
> > http://www.google.com/search?q=Boston
> >
> > This URI references a collection of 7,200,000 other URIs each of which
> > reference a resource that at least at one time contained the
> > term "Boston"
>
> Yes, but none of those URIs are representations of "Boston".  Instead,
they
> represent results of searches about Boston, people who live in or have
> visited Boston, historical events... none of those URIs capture "essence
of
> Boston".  And there's another catch: Are we talking about Boston the place
> (which one? the one in England? the crater on the Moon?), the string
> B-o-s-t-o-n, or something else completely?

All this is correct. The point being that we can already easily create URIs
from string literals, indeed URIs that frequently return useful information
in reference to the string literal. The problems with search engines are
well known. I'm suggesting that we think about ways to improve upon the
current situation.

Jonathan Borden
The Open Healthcare Group
http://www.openhealth.org
Received on Tuesday, 6 February 2001 15:36:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:38 GMT