- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 15:05:06 -0400
- To: hardie@qualcomm.com
- cc: Michael Mealling <michael@neonym.net>, Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com, uri@w3.org
> At 2:35 PM -0400 7/9/03, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> > > > I'm using the word "same" in the normal dictionary sense of being
> >> > truly and completely indistinguishable. If I tell you <Jim>
> >> > owl:sameAs <James>, then you know I'm using the terms "<Jim>" and
> >> > "<James>" as synonyms, as two names for the same thing.
> >>
> >> Absolutely correct! _You_ have told me that "Jim" and "James" are
> >> synonymous. But RFC 2396 provides no method for making such statements.
> >
> >I can put aside the OWL terminology entirely.
> >
> >You seem to be saying that
> > http://www.w3.org/
> >and
> > http://WWW.w3.org/
> >could not possibly ever both identify the same resource. You seem to
> >be saying that if two URIs are textually different, they cannot
> >possibly identify the same thing.
>
> I don't think that's quite what he said. He said that the knowledge that two
> identifiers were equivalent was outside the generic URI syntax, and based
> in the semantics of the scheme or the application using the scheme.
I wish he had said that, but he didn't. I'm giving him every chance
to say that, but he's not taking it.
-- sandro
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2003 15:05:45 UTC