W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2007

Re: Terminology Question concerning Web Architecture and Linked Data

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:47:32 -0500
Message-Id: <p0623090bc2cd3c3bb2a9@[]>
To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: "John Cowan" <cowan@ccil.org>, www-tag@w3.org

>On 7/25/07, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote:
>>A still better way to put it is that there are no identical*s*
>>(plural), since if A is identical to B then there is only one thing
>>being talked about. Nothing is identical to anything *else*, only to
>>itself. These are all synonyms: the set {A, B} has one thing in it; A
>>and B are the very same thing; 'A' is just another name for B, and
>>'B' for A; A is identical to B; A=B; owl:sameAs :A :B And that is
>>*why* they... er, sorry, it, is indiscernible: because one cannot
>>discern between something and itself.
>Exactly.  Which is why the fact that the URIs can be used to
>indirectly refer to different things means they can't be owl:sameAs.
>Do you agree?

Well, Im not sure what you are saying. I can assert that A=B even 
though 'A' =/= 'B' and both of the names *can* be used to refer to 
other things. What Im saying by making that assertion is that this 
possibility, which could be true, isn't. Similarly, I can assert that

owl:sameAs  ex:uri1  ex:uri2 .

Of course, that assertion should be incompatible with using the URIs 
to refer to different things, so if they do get used that way then my 
assertion is false.


>Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.         http://www.markbaker.ca
>Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies  http://www.coactus.com

IHMC		(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502			(850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2007 17:47:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:53 UTC