RE: RDF and speech acts

I would be interested in that, too. We are missing some philosophical
stuff here. If you find anything, please post it here.


I remember the "URI crisis", that tackles the question of "what does a
URI identify?". Especially the problem of "how do i represent love?"

http://www.ontopia.net/topicmaps/materials/identitycrisis.html
http://www.w3.org/2002/11/dbooth-names/dbooth-names_clean.htm
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/HTTP-URI



Here is something cut/n/pasted from my diploma thesis about identifying
general concepts (like "red"):

A URI can be used to identify an abstract concept. Again we have an
example, the identification of  the concept of "love". A solution here
would be to use WordNet  identifiers for the meaning of English words,
as Dan Brickley suggested in [Brickley2001]. According to his definition
(and a correction by Libby Miller [Miller2003]), "love" could be
expressed with this URI.

"http://xmlns.com/wordnet/1.6/love-4".
Figure 6 The "Love" URI

Some common concepts can be identified with this method, Dan Brickley
and Libby Miller used it to identify the concept of a "person" in their
FOAF, project. [FOAF].



hth
Leo Sauermann
www.gnowsis.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Garret Wilson
> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 2:25 AM
> To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: RDF and speech acts
> 
> 
> 
> I'm adding loads of fun to RDF by reading Searle's _Speech Acts_. In 
> particular, his discussion of predication (Chapter 5, page 97) is 
> interesting---he claims that while a subject can "refer" to a 
> particular, predication does not in the same sense involve 
> "referring" 
> to a universal.
> 
> I've discussed on this list the need to identify the resource an RDF 
> literal represents using, for example, a URI; RDF does not 
> allow this. I 
> have considered the distinction between resource nodes and 
> literal nodes 
> to be of syntactic convenience only. However, upon reflection 
> it seems 
> that historically literal nodes have been used to represent 
> universals 
> (e.g. "red" or "heavy")---although of late the RDF community 
> seems to be 
> encouraging URI-identified resources for this purpose---and resource 
> nodes have been used to represent particulars. There is a certain 
> empirical parallel, at least. Searle's explanations the analysis more 
> interesting.
> 
> My question is ancillary: Can someone recommend a reading list that 
> addresses the intersection of the philosophy of language, semiotics, 
> RDF, and the semantic web?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Garret
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 25 November 2003 05:21:28 UTC