Re: "tdb" and "duri" URI schemes...

FWIW, I can't understand what you are talking about here.

On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote:

> Personally, one of the things that I find myself dwelling on is the
> infinite order  -- there are uncountably many "things", but only a
> countable number of "descriptions".
>

Definitions? Proof?
Even if there was a counting argument to be made here, I can't see how you
would arrive at "things that *can* be described". You might perhaps land up
with "things that *have* been described". But there isn't a unique mapping
of countable on to uncountable sets.


> At least, for me, the distinction isn't silly or meaningless. In addition,
> the notion of "identity" is
> associated with the description rather than the thing-described
>

Which notion of identity? There are a number.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity/
There are certainly notions of identity associated with (any)things.


> ,which seems to me to be an important distinction; I'd rather elaborate
> these
> ideas than leave them unstated.
>

Elaboration would be good.

>
> That is, "things" don't really form a set, in the sense of having
> a clear equality relationship.
>

?


>  We talked about this before and I don't think I convinced you, but perhaps
> you'll have more sympathy for
> my continuing to talk about "anything that can be described" vs "anything".
>

I'd be interested in an attempt to be convinced. But as another heads up,
what you are saying here seems in contradiction to the basis of all the
SemWeb languages, which I think would be setting precedent.

-Alan