- From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:17:20 +0100 (BST)
- To: Martyn Horner <martyn.horner@profium.com>
- cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, 11 May 2001, Martyn Horner wrote: > Thus put very blandly: URI=resource->entity > > Am I picking up the right messages? I suggest we base a vocabulary on a > (better written) form of these ideas. It may annoy philosophers, but from the POV of writing an RDF DB, "URI=resource"* is a reasonable (or at least commonly-held) viewpoint. The nomenclature is bound to lead to philosophical debate; it comes down to this: - whatever we use as identifiers in an RDFDB is conceptually mapped onto "the real world" by some imterpretive function - which side of the function the things we refer to as "resources" live is unclear; in fact, it might be used colloquially to refer to "ur" or "entity" and the meaning derived from context; - deriving meaning from context is fuzzy and can lead to confusion. jan * modulo anon resources -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287163 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk User interface? I hardly know 'er!
Received on Friday, 11 May 2001 09:18:59 UTC