Re: Refers Or Denotes?

I have no problem with "denotes", though I thought Melvin mentioned earlier
that the meaning was difficult to understand. Or was it "uniquely denotes"
that bothered you? I'm also for "denotes".

Andrei


On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Melvin Carvalho
<melvincarvalho@gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
> On 11 February 2013 21:37, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>
>> Henry / Andrei,
>>
>> I current see:
>> "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.
>>
>
> Wasnt this settled in the vote as 'denotes'.
>
> I dont mind either, so long as we can move forward.
>
> FWIW, Would lean towards 'denotes'.
>
>
>>
>>
>> Links:
>>
>> 1. http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-**rdf11-concepts-20130115/#**
>> resources-and-statements<http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-rdf11-concepts-20130115/#resources-and-statements>.
>> 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-**rdf11-concepts-20130115/<http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-rdf11-concepts-20130115/>-- latest RDF 1.1 Concepts and Abstract Syntax edition .
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Kingsley Idehen
>> Founder & CEO
>> OpenLink Software
>> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/**blog/~kidehen<http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen>
>> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
>> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/**112399767740508618350/about<https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about>
>> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/**kidehen<http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>