- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:06:12 -0700
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>pat hayes wrote: > > > > >Brian McBride wrote: > > > > > > > > pat hayes wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > Wait a minute. The subject is a URI, not a Resource, right? The > > > > > Resource is what the subject (a piece of syntax) denotes, not the > > > > > subject itself. > > > > > >That's what you'd think, coming from a logic background, but > > >as Brian points out, RDF says the subject of > > > Mary hit the ball. > > > > > >is a female person, not a word starting with 'M'. > > > > > >This is mother of all use/mention bugs, IMO. > > > > > >cf > > > > Indeed. If we have to take this seriously then I withdraw the model > > theory, since it can't possibly work. > >You mean the reification part of the model theory, right? > >The rest is fine. No, I meant it all. But I spoke hastily. I guess anything can be a symbol, so maybe my mother *could* be in a grammar. However, it wouldn't be a grammar that could be described in BNF (since she - my mother, that is - is at least three-dimensional, and BNF only describes one-dimensional structures, ie strings.) Also, I would bet that anyone would have a hell of a time getting my mother to stay in an RDF graph for any length of time: she would have it vacuumed and dusted before you would have time to even parse it. Pat > > Such a beastie, consisting of > > triples of real things, isn't even a language, so it can't have a > > semantics. (It also cannot have a grammar, by the way, since BNF only > > refers to strings of symbols, and my mother isn't a symbol.) > >-- >Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- (650)859 6569 w (650)494 3973 h (until September) phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2001 15:05:01 UTC