W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > September 2004

Re: web proper names

From: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 16:44:09 -0400
Message-ID: <414F4119.8030503@comcast.net>
To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Harry Halpin wrote:

> 	Again, I would recommend reading the part about Kripke in the 
> paper. That's the theory WPN is based on -> a referent such as the person
> identified by "Jon Hanna" is going to be Jon Hanna even if he grows his
> hair and wears bright yellow. That's why many of the parameters in
> WPN are option.

I think this is equivalent to saying that some properties are 
"inverseFunctional" (in that horrible OWL term), and most are not.

> 	Again, I think Thomas Passim's solution of adding RDF predicates
> is a good direction for thought:
> 1) subjectIsTheThingReturnedByThisURI
> 2) theDocumentAtThisUriDescribesTheSubject
> 3) theDocumentAtThisUriIsAboutTheSubject
> Any debate on these? Still, Web Proper Names are meant to solve the 
> problem in a RDF-neutral matter, and can solve via either a new URI
> scheme or using a new format (RDDL-based) for representing things qua
> things. Enjoying the discussion...

No matter how you decide to indicate this kind of notion, I suggest that 
we first get clear about what is desired semantically.  Then there can 
be different ways to express the concept.

I think/claim that the three kinds of relations summarized above in the 
three predicate names encompass the most common (by far) needs for 
relating subjects to URIs in rdf/topic maps/you-name-it.

Agree? Disagree?


Tom P

Thomas B. Passin
Explorer's Guide to the Semantic Web (Manning Books)
Received on Monday, 20 September 2004 20:41:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:52 UTC