- From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
- Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 20:41:16 -0400
- To: "Bullard, Claude L \(Len\)" <clbullar@ingr.com>, "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>
- Cc: "'Bill de hOra'" <dehora@eircom.net>, <www-tag@w3.org>
Tim Berners-Lee wrote: > > > > No one is (I think, on this list) suggesting that all statements on the > semantic web > will be consistent. Indeed, the semantic web is designed on the > assumption > that there will be lots of contradictory statements out there. I am in complete agreement. > > However, on the web one *does* have a way to own and be the > authority on an identifier, and there is no right of a third party to > argue that > it means something else. > Perhaps you might more precisely define what is meant by "it means something" other than what the authority intends. A URI identifies a (single) resource, and representations of the resource are determined only by the owning authority. No question. However, anyone can say anything about the URI/resource, and in one sense _if_ the full meaning of a resource is related to the graph which might contain all sorts of, perhaps conflicting, statements about the resource, we need a mechanism to determine what the resource actually means. Depending on the semantics we apply i.e. how we define "meaning" of a resource, third parties might indeed argue over which sets of assertions are "true". I don't think all these issues have been worked out in complete detail, perhaps we can acknowledge that. Jonathan
Received on Wednesday, 7 August 2002 20:47:46 UTC