Re: more about dereference (notes from MIT post F2F2-day-1)

On 13 Oct 2011, at 13:37, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 22:58 -0500, Pat Hayes wrote:
>> Actually, I want to subtly change (1).
>> 
>> On Oct 12, 2011, at 4:04 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>> 
>>> Some of us kept talking for a few more hours.    Everyone was
>>> more-or-less cool with these observations about dereference:
>>> 
>>> 1. If a system successfully dereferences URL "L" and obtains a
>>> representation of an RDF graph, then <L> is a GraphContainer.
>> 
>> That seems like http-range-14 wearing a Hawaiian shirt. 
>> 
>>> That
>>> is, "L" denotes a GraphContainer.  Logically, GraphContainer is
>>> disjoint from foaf:Person (I think!!) so a document that includes "<>
>>> a foaf:Person" is (by this proposal) logically inconsistent with it
>>> being served on the Web.
>> 
>> No, its not *logically* inconsistent. What it implies is that there is something in the intersection of foaf:Person and GraphContainer. But these being disjoint has to be part of an ontology of GraphContainers rather than a *logical* axiom, I suggest. That is, we don't build this into the very semantics. 
> 
> Agreed.  I would leave this up to, for instance, the people providing an
> ontology for foaf:Person to say it's disjoint from GraphContainer.
> 

Maybe :) Can an ebook be a graphcontainer? 
Or a print of it? Printed on a person? Can an api like mturk that has human as the 'backend'? A gopher server? A fax system? 

What else could never-ever be a graphcontainer?

Dan

>    -- Sandro
> 
>> Pat
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
>