- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 17:32:58 -0500
- To: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com wrote: >[...] > > > The set of statements that are subject > > > of semantic interpretation can be selected in an unspecified, > > > application-specific way. > > > > I'm trying to understand what you mean and I'm struggling > > with that last sentence. No matter how many times I > > read it, I'm not understanding it. > > It's in particular that > > set of statements > > subject > > semantic interpretation > > unspecified selection > > So what does that last sentence actually mean? > >Let me give an example. We expect to find RDF statements on many >webpages and in many online data sources. Specific applications >typically consider only a subset of all available data (e.g. certain >domain, certain set of trusted servers, certain vocabularies, etc.) I >was trying to convey the idea that meaningful semantics exists only for >such limited datasets, whose boundaries are determined in a particular >application context. It probably would be inappropriate to refer to the >set of all webpages on public servers when say defining the semantics of >rdf:type. You guys at db.stanford really do all think alike, don't you? :-) While I agree with your overall theme here, it seems to go beyond the remit of RDFcore, as it requires a basic change to the language. However, what you say about semantics isnt exactly right. After all, one *can* give a model theory for FOL, which is about as global in scope as one could imagine (way larger than the mere Web, for example.) Pat --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2001 18:33:01 UTC