- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 08:41:02 +0100
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@apache.org>
- Cc: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>, www-tag@w3.org
At 15:32 27/07/03 -0500, pat hayes wrote: >>Claiming that the URI cannot >>identify both the conceptual mapping and the real thing outside >>the information system is equivalent to claiming that your >>social security number cannot be used to identify anything other >>than your social security account. > >OK, point taken: so the URI can be ambiguous. I agree names can be >ambiguous in this sense; they can have more than one possible >meaning/referent. ... Is this really true? If a social security number "identifies" a social security account (and nothing else), it can still be used to make reference to a person in a clause of the form "the person whose social security account is identified by social security number xxxx". This doesn't seem like ambiguity to me, but a flexibility of language to express related ideas. #g ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org> PGP: 0FAA 69FF C083 000B A2E9 A131 01B9 1C7A DBCA CB5E
Received on Monday, 28 July 2003 07:03:24 UTC