- 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