W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > December 2013

RE: Proposed resolution needed: ISSUE-148: IRIs do *not* always denote the same resource

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 14:18:11 +0100
To: <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <01ad01cefb2a$7007f150$5017d3f0$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 2:01 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> On 12/17/13 7:06 AM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> > I don't care much whether we use denote or identify. According to Pat,
> > "identify" is technically more correct whereas Richard points out that
> > "denote" is more consistent with the rest of the section. I personally
> > prefer "identify" in this case because I believe that it is the term
> > best aligned with RFC3986/RC3987 and WEBARCH.
> Are you sure that Pat preferred "identify" over "denote" as you've
> presented above?

That's at least how I understood [1]:

Part of the problem is the use of the technical word "denote" here. Why not
use  the mealy-mouth word "meaning": two different appearances of an IRI
have identical meanings. That is technically correct, even if it is a bit
blurrier, because a 'meaning' can indeed be a way of referring ambiguously.
Actually I like this now I have thought of it. (Another option, closer to
this present wording, is to use "identify" rather than "denote".)

... but I'm sure Pat won't hesitate to tell us if he's misquoted :-)


Markus Lanthaler

Received on Tuesday, 17 December 2013 13:18:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:37 UTC