- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 17:27:37 -0400
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
On Wed, 2012-10-03 at 15:42 -0400, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 10/3/12 2:54 PM, David Booth wrote: > > 1. Ambiguity is a fact of life. In spite of the AWWW's > > statement that "By design, a URI identifies one resource", > > http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#id-resources ambiguity of > > reference is inescapable. This is well established in > > philosophy, and basically boils down to the fact that when > > descriptions are used to define things, it is always possible > > to make finer distinctions than a description anticipated. > Are we still using "identifies" when denotes appears to be much clearer > re. this particular matter? FWIW, I agree that "denotes" is better than "identifies". -- David Booth, Ph.D. http://dbooth.org/ Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of his employer.
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2012 21:28:05 UTC