- From: Benja Fallenstein <b.fallenstein@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 17:25:06 +0200
- To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
- CC: jon@spin.ie, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: > I've found it useful to think of URIs as being bound to > particular intensions of resources. > > E.g. several URIs may all denote the same thing, i.e. > > http://example.com/MorningStar > owl:sameIndividualAs > http://example.com/EveningStar ; > owl:sameIndividualAs > http://example.com/Venus . ...but do not *connote* the same thing, would be my term for it. E.g., the representations received when we enter each of the above in a browser may be different. > but each URI, and the statements made about the resource > using that URI, are specific to a particular intension of > the thing denoted. Each URI is specific to a particular intension: ok. Each statement using the URI: Hm. OWL specifies that if A owl:sameIndividualAs B, then all statements you can make about A entail a similar statement about B. E.g., if I say <http://example.com/EveningStar> rdf:type foo:BeautifulThing then I'm implying that <http://example.com/Venus> rdf:type foo:BeautifulThing I think that implying it is basically as good as saying it, so I think that it's not useful to say that the two statements are specific to a particular intension of the thing described, because if I make one of the statements, I also make the other (in RDF+OWL). What do you think? - Benja
Received on Monday, 28 July 2003 11:26:50 UTC