- From: Katia Sycara <katia@cs.cmu.edu>
- Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 09:59:15 -0500
- 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 UTC