- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:10:02 +0000
- To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Cc: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 01:46 PM 1/23/02 +0200, Patrick Stickler wrote:
> > OTOH, without allowing
> > that it seems that URI-refs don't offer anything that label strings like
> > "Lois" and "Jimmy" don't also offer. The point of my comment was to
> > suggest that matters relating to personal belief of identity shouldn't
> > really be expressed in terms of URIs.
>
>But your examples are not about belief of identity, they
>are about belief of properties of entities which are given
>identity.
>
>I.e., you weren't saying that <person:Lois> <ex:accepts> that
>"Superman" <ex:is> <person:Superman>.
My take on this scenario was that Lois' non-belief that Clark Kent is
strong is rather bound up with her belief about the identity of the person
she knows as "Clark Kent"; i.e. that she does not recognize him as also
being the person she knows as "Superman".
I think some alternative formulation of this scenario could lead to a
situation in which Clark Kent and Superman have universally accepted
denotations, and URIs may then be appropriate. In this case, I think that
it's not possible that they denote exactly the same thing; e.g. Clark Kent
denotes a person X wearing a suit and glasses; Superman denotes the same
person X wearing a natty blue-and-red number. In this formulation, using
URIs seems less troublesome.
#g
------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
__
/\ \
/ \ \
/ /\ \ \
/ / /\ \ \
/ / /__\_\ \
/ / /________\
\/___________/
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2002 07:15:22 UTC