W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > July 2010

Re: Subjects as Literals

From: Henry Story <henry.story@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 08:45:58 +0200
Cc: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-Id: <188BF212-3B72-4794-9C62-C57C9FF1FD2C@gmail.com>
To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>

On 8 Jul 2010, at 20:30, David Booth wrote:

> On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 11:03 -0500, Pat Hayes wrote:
>> On Jul 6, 2010, at 9:23 PM, David Booth wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 20:45 +0200, Henry Story wrote:
>>> [ . . . ]
>>>> foaf:knows a rdf:Property .
>>>> Well we can dereference foaf:knows to find out what it means. This is
>>>> the canonical way to find it's meaning, and is the initial  
>>>> procedure we
>>>> should use to arbitrate between competing understandings of its  
>>>> meaning.
>>> Right.  The document you get upon dereferencing -- the "follow your
>>> nose" document -- acts as a URI declaration.[1]
>>> 1. http://dbooth.org/2007/uri-decl/
>> Just to clarify, that is David's idea and his suggestion. It seems  
>> like a sensible idea, in many ways. It seems to reflect some current  
>> practice. But it is not part of the current RDF spec., and it is  
>> controversial.
> No, it was not my idea.  I cannot claim any credit for it.  The idea was
> already around and in fairly common practice (though not universal) when
> I first wrote it up in 2007.  I do not know who came up with it.  All I
> did was write it up, give it a descriptive name "URI declaration" (so
> that we could all refer to it more easily), and promote it.

The general idea is widely accepted, but the interpretation using speech
acts is certainly original and controversial.

There is also an issue that one can imagine conventions arising in other
ways too btw...

Which is to say it is interesting and can be developed further.

Received on Friday, 9 July 2010 06:46:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:12 UTC