W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2007

RE: Building terminological consensus, part 1: Foundations

From: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) <skw@hp.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:00:00 +0100
Message-ID: <C4B3FB61F7970A4391A5C10BAA1C3F0DBB3292@sdcexc04.emea.cpqcorp.net>
To: "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: "www-tag" <www-tag@w3.org>

Hello Pat,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pat Hayes [mailto:phayes@ihmc.us] 
> Sent: 10 July 2007 16:10
> To: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
> Cc: www-tag
> Subject: RE: Building terminological consensus, part 1: Foundations
> >Hello Pat, Henry,
> >
> >>  >Finally for this first message, note that there is another  
> >> >correspondence which I think obtains:
> >>  >
> >>  >   pl:baptism == [webarch:minting] ([2] itself doesn't actually
have a
> >>  >                                    term for this, but minting is
> >>  >                                    used in discussion of the Web
> >>  >
> >>  >In both cases the person who first 'utters' a name has the 
> >> authority  >and takes the responsibility for determining the  
> >> >pl:referent/webarch:resource it will thenceforth  
> >> >pl:denote/webarch:identify.
> >>
> >>  Ah, but (very important point) to take responsibility for
> >> isn't to actually baptize. There isn't anything in  the webarch: 
> >> domain corresponding to pl:baptizing,  in fact: a central lack in
> >> Web world picture that  I've been complaining about for years.
> >
> >FWIW I think that text around
> >http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#uri-assignment may be relevant.
> >Doubtless the terminology will not be to everyones liking, 
> and it may stop short full immersion, but it does concern the
establishment of 
> >associations of URI with Resources.
> Not as far as I can see. Can you be more exact with the citation?

Well I had in mind the text sections 2.2.2 and which speaks of
"URI allocation" in the sense establishing an association between a URI
and what it is used to denote.
I'll grant that it actually says:

	"URI allocation is the process of associating a URI with a

and says nothing of denotation - nor does it stay "How" to do that which
is of course what you are looking for. 

There were a few of 'a' words floating about "allocation", "assignment",
"authority"... and couple of operationally practices that needed names -
the divvy'ing up of URI space into blocks of ownership; and the
association of URIs with the things they identifty (wanted to to avoid
that word - so... denote). I'd have preferred assignment for the latter,
but somehow we chose 'allocation'.

> Yes, I've read all of that stuff. It all talks about 
> OWNERSHIP. OK, lets take it as undisputed that I OWN, say, 
> "http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/PatHayes.html" 
> . It is MINE, to do with what I like. (Evil cackle, rubbing of hands.)
> Now, what I actually want to do with it is, to make it denote 
> me. I want to baptize me with that URI, to attach that URI to 
> me. HOW DO I DO THAT? 

I cannot help but feel on the edge of a hole with a shovel being placed
in my hand and a bear trap at the bottom... but...

Well... as OWNER of that URI YOU let it be widely known THAT this
particular URI denotes YOU. 

You assert it to be true in as many ways as you can; 
	as in the email to which I am replying; 
	as in the declaration that I end up getting if I happen to try
and 'poke' that URI (ignoring any quibbles about 303's).

I guess if you want to help semantic web agents, you also make available
some RDF assertions along the lines that Dan Brickley suggested [1].

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007May/0081

> What constitutes an act of naming, and how is the result of 
> that act recorded?

The internal decision that you make as owner of the URI as to what it
refers and whatever records you keep (tangible or otherwise) to make
sure that you don't later change your mind and have it refer to
something else. 

If you choose to publish the fact of the new naming assigment in an
email to (amongst other things) say a persitent archive - that may serve
as a more enduring record that archivists of the long distant future may
come across. Organsing for the web to answer the question "To what does
<http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/PatHayes.html> refer?" as you have will
save you having to answer a lot of bothersome emails asking just that
question - though finding the OWNER of a URI in order to ask the
question is also a trial. The more widely known the name assignment
becomes the more likely is that it will be used consisently by others as
a name for YOU. 

I think its largely a social process - potential backed with a little
bit of web technology - and inflicted with evolving custom and practice.

> There simply is nothing said about this anywhere in the W3C corpus,
AFAIK. Its a huge gaping gap in the whole picture.

I'm not going to argue that there isn't a gap.

> Pat
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> IHMC		(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
> 40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
> Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
> FL 32502			(850)291 0667    cell
> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes

Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks
RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Tuesday, 10 July 2007 17:01:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:16 UTC