W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > January 2007

Re: Axiom: Opacity of URIs

From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 10:29:03 -0500
Message-ID: <459E6EBF.6050200@w3.org>
To: rreck@rrecktek.com
Cc: semantic-web@w3.org


In this case you are using URIs to represent words, which really is 
bridging two very different worlds.

URIs are typically used to represent the identify of a web page or the 
semantics of  a data field, which are fairly well defined, whereas words 
in a language have meanings which morph and fork with time.
Most of the advice about choosing good URIs, then, will be less 
applicable t you when you use a URI to refer to a word.

Yes, it seems reasonable to qualify it with a language.

Note that RDF literals carry an optional language designator.

Check out the wordnet work, and glossary work such as SIOC.


Ronald P. Reck wrote:
> I have a question about URIs. I think I understand the axioms here:
> http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html
> My question concerns the Axiom: Opacity of URIs
> When I work with words/strings I want to say something about them.
> Now, imagine the English word "pain".
> rdf:about="http://foo.com/lexicon/token#pain"
> Its real helpful to be able to derive its URI so that every time I come
> upon the same string I dont incur the "pain" associated with asking some
> system the question: do you know the URI for the string "pain"?
> Now, imagine I am processing French and I also have the string "pain".
> Well, I believe its intrinsically a different word so I think it makes 
> sense to change my URI structure to
> rdf:about="http://foo.bar/lexicon/fre/token#pain"
> Attractive but wrong?
> Wrong only when I look for French words with "//fre" ?
> I run into the same situation when I want to manage definitions for
> words from multiple communities of interest. The word "frequency" has
> slightly different meanings in the domain of mathematics, physics or
> signal processing. Again, it is attractive to have derivable URI's.
> Can someone please comment or point me at relevant disscussion in this 
> area? -thanks.
Received on Friday, 5 January 2007 15:29:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:54 UTC