- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:47:52 -0700
- To: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
[Pat Hayes:] > > > > PS. Heres how Ive been translating this debate internally, which may > > help get the central issues clear. > > resource <----> entity (ie anything at all, anything in the > > universe or out of it, anything that can possibly be referred to or > > quantified over; anything that can be conceived of in the mind of > > Man, God or Tim B-L; the most general category possible.) > > URI <------> name, referring expression > > literal <-----> numeral, a special kind of referring expression > > from which the referent can be computed. > > [...] [Sergey Melnik:] >I think we need a glossary like that at some point! Mine is: > >entity (constant) = anything identifiable >resource (constant) = URI, name, referring expression >literal (constant) = like yours OK, the place we are mismatched is, not surprisingly, the relationship between "URI" and "resource". I understand "resource" to mean a thing; you understand it to mean a name. I think URI's *denote* resources; you think resources *are* URIs. (Others, I gather, think that URI's are something like the address of a resource.) We need to get this issue resolved or we will just sink ever deeper into terminological quicksand. Since these terms belong to the W3C, maybe we can appeal to them for a ruling on this question? Anyone out there who claims to know what the answer is?? Pat --------------------------------------------------------------------- (650)859 6569 w (650)494 3973 h (until September) phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2001 15:47:55 UTC