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

Re: universal languages

From: Katia Sycara <katia@cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 09:59:15 -0500
Message-ID: <003501c09116$8ec11360$86d50280@cimds.ri.cmu.edu>
To: Bill dehOra <BdehOra@interx.com>, "'Stefan Decker'" <stefan@db.stanford.edu>, Jim Hendler <jhendler@darpa.mil>
Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Bill, in answer to your question, of San Fransisco invading Boston etc, it
is obvious to me that a "part-of" relation between San Fransisco and Boston
can be established that relates the two previously established OIDs.
 Cheers, Katia
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill dehOra" <BdehOra@interx.com>
To: "'Stefan Decker'" <stefan@db.stanford.edu>; "Jim Hendler"
<jhendler@darpa.mil>
Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:11 AM
Subject: RE: universal languages


>
> :I'am only claiming that we need an OIDs to uniquely identify
> :entities on the web. However, the same entity can have multiple OIDs.
> :(and then "equivalent-to" is a great mechanism).
> :But no OID should identify multiple entities.
> :In other words: if I come up with an ID for Boston, nobody should
> :be able to use this as an ID for San Francisco - or at least
> :this abuse should be easy detectable.
>
> If the city of San Fransisco invaded Boston tommorrow and declared that
> Boston is now part of San Fransisco, which OID should we be using?
>
> Bill de hOra
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 7 February 2001 10:03:08 GMT

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