- From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
- Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2002 18:51:42 -0400
- To: <www-tag@w3.org>, "Norman Walsh" <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Norman Walsh wrote: > | > | To summarize, a URI always identifies a single resource, regardless of who > | is using the URI and regardless of which claims are made about the resource. > > Ah, perhaps I get it after all: > > You have a reasoning system that uses URIs as identifiers. Because > that system is incapable of "knowing" anything about a URI other than > the string of characters that comprise it, it is axiomatic that if two > URIs are textually identical, they must mean the same thing. > > I think I can understand that. > > Is it widely accepted fact that this is a feature of all such > reasoning systems? Perhaps it is, I don't know. > Yes I would say that every time we use a single URI we refer to the same resource, but perhaps in different contexts. The meaning of a URI is the same as the meaning of the resource it refers to. How such a meaning of a resource is determined is context dependent. A resource may have different meanings in different contexts (e.g. as asserted by two different individuals). We may choose to believe either one or the other context, that is we may choose to believe either one or the other set of assertions about a resource. That we might do this doesn't change the fact that the resource is identified by a URI (under RDF and the RDF model theory http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt). "context" isn't a feature of RDF 1, but I think it's important. Jonathan
Received on Saturday, 3 August 2002 19:07:24 UTC