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: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 08:56:58 -0500
Message-ID: <52B0582A.9000200@openlinksw.com>
To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 12/17/13 8:18 AM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> 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
> that's
>>> 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 :-)
> [1]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Dec/0091.html
> --
> Markus Lanthaler
> @markuslanthaler

IRIs are used as a denotation mechanism in regards to RDF. An Identity 
card can be used to identify me. That same card will also consist of an 
identifier that denotes (signifies) me. The identifier in said card 
enables it identify me via a collection of claims (the kind one can 
express using RDF statements).

Denotation (signification) and Identification are not the same thing. Of 
course, IRIs can be used to identify and denote, but that's all about 
the effect of the dreaded "resource" word that's an eternal confusion 
vector with regards to AWWW (Architecture World Wide Web). RDF isn't 
about crafting Webs (networks or clouds) of Web accessible resources 
where each is "identified" and "signified" by an HTTP URL. It goes 
beyond that by enabling the use of HTTP URIs to denote entities that 
aren't Web artifacts.

In addition, as Richard already pointed out, "denote" is already used 
extensively in RDF literature, so why undo all of that?

[1] http://bit.ly/Jfs12P -- illustrating my understanding of RDF (unless 
that illustration is "false" I struggle to see how we can coherently use 



Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen

Received on Tuesday, 17 December 2013 13:57:20 UTC

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