- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 02:32:44 +0100
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Cc: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>, "public-rdf-comments@w3.org" <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>, public-webid Group <public-webid@w3.org>, "public-philoweb@w3.org" <public-philoweb@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKaEYhKfZGSeaRePP0cZEHSAuPBZPa11Hz2E9Re+7Ax7yoP23w@mail.gmail.com>
On 12 February 2013 23:09, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote: > > On Feb 12, 2013, at 2:58 PM, Henry Story wrote: > > > A question that came up on the WebID mailing list. We'd just like some > clarification > > for the use of denotes, as the issue has come up there. > > > > On 11 Feb 2013, at 21:37, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> > wrote: > > > >> Henry / Andrei, > >> > >> I current see [ in > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/raw-file/tip/spec/identity-respec.html ] > >> "A WebID is an HTTP URI which *refers* to an Agent (Person, > Organization, Group, Device, etc.)." > >> > >> But in the context of RDF based Linked Data, the RDF workgroup (after > serious thought on this matter) [1] has opted to use what would equate to: > >> > >> A WebID is an HTTP URI which *denotes* an Agent (Person, Organization, > Group, Device, etc.). > >> > >> The more we stick to definitions and terminology being used across > other W3C groups the easier things will be (on the appreciation and > adoption front) for WebID, over the long haul. > > > >> > >> Links: > >> > >> 1. > http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-rdf11-concepts-20130115/#resources-and-statements. > >> 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-rdf11-concepts-20130115/ -- latest RDF > 1.1 Concepts and Abstract Syntax edition . > > > > I am not sure why "denotes" is being taken up by the RDF group nowadays, > when most philosophy books and logic books tend to use the word "refer". > > Not in my experience, but YMMV. > > > Most engineers use the word refer too on a daily basis. > > > > In fact it is quite clear from the RDF concepts text that the two words > are near synonymous, since what an IRI denotes is called its referent: > > Yes. "denotes" is identical in meaning to "refers to". We could also have > said "names", but that introduces potential baggage over what counts as a > true name, proper names, etc.., so we avoided it deliberately. > > > [[ > > Any IRI or literal denotes some thing in the universe of discourse. > These things are called resources. Anything can be a resource, including > physical things, documents, abstract concepts, numbers and strings; the > term is synonymous with “entity”. The resource denoted by an IRI is called > its referent, > > ]] > > > > I am ok with denotes. But we can also use referent according to that > text. > > The verb form is "refer". "Referent" corresponds to "denotation". > > > So I don't think this is a very settled matter - given furthermore that > the above is not yet a final spec. > > > > I would like to know why this decision is being made though. Is that > just an aesthetic statement, or is there more behind it? > > I may be responsible for "denote" in the RDF specs. I used it when writing > the 2004 semantics specification. As far as I am concerned it is simply an > English word, the most natural one to use in this context. It is not > intended to convey anything unusual or to sneak anything in by the back > door. So, yes, purely aesthetic. If you prefer the "refers to"/"referent" > language, that is fine with me. They mean the same thing. > +1 A WebID URI that denotes an Agent. The spec may not say that now, for various reasons, and I'm 100% happy to support that. But if all goes well that's the destination ... > > Pat > > > > > Henry > > > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Kingsley Idehen > >> Founder & CEO > >> OpenLink Software > >> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com > >> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen > >> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen > >> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about > >> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>The rest is tactics > > > > Social Web Architect > > http://bblfish.net/ > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 > 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office > Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax > FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile > phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes > > > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2013 01:33:14 UTC