Re: use/mention and reification

On 2002-01-23 14:10, "ext Graham Klyne" <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
wrote:

> 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.

I see your point. Though I'm not sure that the Dan's do. Talking about
some person X named "Superman" (who might later be deemed to equate to
<person:Superman>) is not the same as using "person:Superman" rather
than <person:Superman> to avoid instantiating a URI labeled resource
node in the RDF graph.

Eh?

Patrick

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com

Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2002 08:40:50 UTC