- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:52:44 -0400
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: Chris Bizer <chris@bizer.de>, www-tag@w3.org, SW-forum Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, Linking Open Data <linking-open-data@simile.mit.edu>, Jonathan A Rees <jar@mumble.net>
On Jul 10, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Dan Connolly wrote: > On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 14:43 +0200, Chris Bizer wrote: > >> Question 3: Depending on the answer to question 1, is it correct >> to use >> owl:sameAs [6] to state that http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/ >> card#i and >> http://dbpedia.org/resource/Tim_Berners-Lee refer to the same >> thing as it is >> done in Tim's profile. > > Yes... > > That's sort of a circular question. It's correct because Tim says > it's correct, and he owns that name. That's not the usual sense of "correct". In this context, I believe that the wordnet sense of "correct" that is intended is "free from error; especially conforming to fact or truth" Or Wikipedia: "In everyday use, the correctness of a statement is determined by whether or not it matches reality. People can think a statement is correct and be wrong." If I had a profile that said, in effect, that I was president of the United States, then that would be incorrect regardless of whether I owned the name (I am taking the "owned name" that you are referring to to be http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card#i since that's the only name in the vicinity that Tim could correctly claim to be owned by him). If I'm using the wrong sense of "correct", perhaps you could provide me a definition of "correct" by which I could understand your claim. Regards, -Alan
Received on Friday, 20 July 2007 02:53:14 UTC