- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 17:53:51 -0000
- To: "Bill dehOra" <BdehOra@interx.com>, <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
> what mechanism is to be used to bind a semantically empty > string to a property, on the web, using rdf language? Binding that > string to a URI isn't adequate in itself and I think it's an error to > conflate a unique entity with a meaningful one. True. But I'm not discussing *why* we would want to do this, only *how*. > I grant you that "namespaced:loves", "tomahto:tomato", > "tomayto:tomato" and suchlike really gets you out of a > hole with controlling any such ambiguity (on the assumption > that programs which share terms share processes). Yes: it's fully posible to have a property name that isn't anything like the property... I could define myns:author as being how many carrots someone owns. But that's not a problem, becuse you can call equivalence, and say well this is a fundamental term, and it ties into these. That's what the SW is about, groups of fundamental properties, so that you can translate a into a+1 or, even x into y if they are performing the same functions. > When the web is presented to a person that person will impose > semantics. That doesn't in any way make a web with machine > processable semantics. I'm sorry if I'm being a PITA about this, > but it's important to avoid invoking generalised AI handwaving > and automagicking demons. No, I fully agree. The SW can't/won't/shouldn't be any form of AI.. it's just machines processing data in very useful ways. Humans always have the last laugh, so transmitting the data correctly is the most important thing. -- Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer @prefix : <http://infomesh.net/2001/01/n3terms/#> . [ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] has :homepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
Received on Friday, 19 January 2001 12:56:09 UTC