Re: Issue-57

Sorry, Tim, you get two of the same message. I did a reply instead of reply-all.

From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org<mailto:timbl@w3.org>>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:42:50 -0400
To: Xiaoshu Wang <xiao@renci.org<mailto:xiao@renci.org>>
Cc: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org<mailto:jar@creativecommons.org>>, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com<mailto:alanruttenberg@gmail.com>>, David Booth <david@dbooth.org<mailto:david@dbooth.org>>, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com<mailto:jeni@jenitennison.com>>, "www-tag@w3.org<mailto:www-tag@w3.org> List" <www-tag@w3.org<mailto:www-tag@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: Issue-57


On 2011-06 -24, at 16:22, Xiaoshu Wang wrote:



From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org<mailto:timbl@w3.org>>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:14:51 -0400
To: Xiaoshu Wang <xiao@renci.org<mailto:xiao@renci.org>>
Cc: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org<mailto:jar@creativecommons.org>>, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com<mailto:alanruttenberg@gmail.com>>, David Booth <david@dbooth.org<mailto:david@dbooth.org>>, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com<mailto:jeni@jenitennison.com>>, "www-tag@w3.org<mailto:www-tag@w3.org> List" <www-tag@w3.org<mailto:www-tag@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: Issue-57


On 2011-06 -24, at 15:00, Xiaoshu Wang wrote:
[...]
Go try the URI and see what the author says. If he didn't, use it whatever
way you want. If the author is not careful of making such statement, it is
his careless. If the author says one way, and you insist the other way,
then it is your ignorance or arrogance.


Suppose the URI is
http://www.knox.edu/Images/_News/news_media/img/2005/obama-barack-1ss.jpg

According to your proposal, what can I use it for in RDF?

First, the presumption is that we will have an assertion of the sort like the follows?

No, in my case there is no such presumption.
There is just the web.
That is a real URI.

What can I use it for in RDDF, according to your proposal?

You say "Go to the URI and see what the author says".
What does that author say?

I think you can use the URI in anyway you want because from a logic point of view, it contradict to the URI's owner's point of view.

I hold the same view as Larry's. That is: all semantic problem is a communication problem. When I make a statement saying:

http://www.knox.edu/Images/_News/news_media/img/2005/obama-barack-1ss.jpg a ex:Person.

I am merely expressing my opinion. Upon receiving the document, it is up to you to decide if it is consistent with your world so to accept or reject it.  In fact, even if the author has asserted that,

http://www.knox.edu/Images/_News/news_media/img/2005/obama-barack-1ss.jpg a ex:Image.

I can still be able to make the earlier statement. It does not imply that I am *wrong* in an absolute sense, it simply suggests that I am offering a model that is inconsistent with the author's (assuming there is an accompanying assertion that Image and Person are disjoint).  But, that is how our knowledge evolves over time. I don't see why TAG should intervene.


Can I use that URI for statements about a picture?
Can I use that URI for statements about Barak Obama?
for example.

Yes, either way is fine.

Xiaoshu