- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 10:24:40 -0500
- To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Cc: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
On Mon, 2010-05-24 at 11:02 -0400, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 2010-05-24 at 10:50 -0400, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > >> In the car now but for the moment, let's just say a reasoner doesn't > >> know my wife. > > > > It doesn't know everything about your wife, but it knows > > enough to distinguish her from other people for the purpose > > of on-line banking, shared calendar access, etc. > > What you are talking about is also not necessarily reference - it is > discrimination. > > The reasoners we have now perhaps have reference, but not to the same > entities that we have reference too. For a DL reasoner, every thing > might as well be a pebble. All it needs is to tell one pebble from > another. Yes, that's my understanding of how reference and communication works. Connect the reasoner to a camera and such, and it will be able to tell people from pebbles, and one person from another by face recognition, and so on. I don't see any sharp distinction between this and some other concept of reference. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 24 May 2010 15:23:12 UTC