- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 11:30:56 +0100
- To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>, "'Sandro Hawke'" <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: uri@w3.org
The formal semantics for RDF talks about there being a *set* of resources. To define a set, there needs to be some notion of equality, or sameness, which I would assume to be the notion used in talking about one-to-one or many-to-one. Of course, this line is applicable only to a semantic web viewpoint, I guess others might vary. Do we mean for resources to be set theoretic in nature? #g -- At 21:10 07/09/03 -0700, Larry Masinter wrote: >Re: Many-to-One vs One-to-One > >I think the question is ill-formed; it assumes that >the space of resources has a well defined equality >relationship. > >Before you can ask if there are two URIs U1 and U2 such >that U1 != U2 but >ResourceIdentifiedBy(U1) == ResourceIdentifiedBy(U2) > >you have to know what '==' means for resources. But >there is no well-defined equality for resources, so >the question doesn't make sense. > > >many-to-one and one-to-one only apply to spaces with >well-defined (and, for that matter, unique) equality >relationships. > >Larry ------------ Graham Klyne GK@NineByNine.org
Received on Monday, 8 September 2003 06:50:38 UTC