- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 18:08:53 +0000
- To: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 03:54 PM 1/22/02 +0000, Jan Grant wrote:
> > So I'm claiming that more often the 'meaning not symbols' (de re) approach
> > to rdf reification results in unacceptable information loss
>
>I think it's clear now that it doesn't. Meaning comes from the
>application of an interpretation function, which is where "clark kent"
>and "superman" collide. Quoting URIs makes no difference here.
I'm still thinking about this (in background mode without a vast amount of
progress).
I think everything you say holds up if you can discuss this in terms of
intended interpretations. But what happens to entailments, which are
defined in terms of all possible interpretations?
#g
------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
__
/\ \
/ \ \
/ /\ \ \
/ / /\ \ \
/ / /__\_\ \
/ / /________\
\/___________/
Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2002 13:12:51 UTC