Tim on a stick (was Re: Telecon points)

[...]

> > > * State, or have Tim state, "Tim's solution", succinctly.
> 
> It's a nice idea, but I'm afraid we'll have to draw it out in
> discussion.  Tim's stated it a few times, but never completely enough
> for everyone.  Personally, I'm happy with his presenting and arguing
> for bits as they are relevant to discussing particular issues.

[...]

Here is my rigid caricature of this solution.  I have, however, restricted
the scope of information to that stored in the Semantic Web.

0/ Names in the Semantic Web are URI references with optional fragment
   identifiers.

1/ The Semantic Web is fundamentally premised on the idea that there is a
   single intended definition for each name in the Semantic Web.

2/ The definition of a name in the Semantic Web is determined from all
   documents stored (stored, not simply accessible) at the URI constructed
   by removing the optional fragment identifier, if any, from the name no
   matter which language, formal or otherwise, they are written in.

3/ The portion of a document that contributes to the definition of a name
   is that portion that related to the name (including fragment identifier,
   if present).

4/ [Optional] The above is true only for names when they are used as
   properties, not when they are used for other purposes.

Peter F. Patel-Schneider

PS:  I disagree strongly with all of the above except point 0.

Received on Wednesday, 24 September 2003 09:51:38 UTC