- From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 10:45:47 -0800
- To: "Henry Story" <henry.story@bblfish.net>, "Jeremy Wong" <50263336@student.cityu.edu.hk>
- Cc: <semantic-web@w3.org>
> [[ > It assumes, implicitly, that URI references have the same meaning > whenever they occur. To provide an adequate semantics which would be > sensitive to temporal changes is a research problem which is beyond > the scope of this document. > ]] > > That is really no problem. It is exactly what first order logic does. I assume they are referring to any of the many philosophical "challenges" regarding identity which led people to assert that FOL was broken and invent new systems. The literature is replete with fun little scenarios that can confuse FOL (or any other system for that matter). On the other hand, I agree that the semantics of FOL (and RDF) are completely adequate for many useful cases, and we can make considerable progress using the simple semantics and simple scenarios without having to solve the age-old philosophical problems.
Received on Wednesday, 9 February 2005 20:00:25 UTC