ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] [Fwd: Re: {Disarmed} Re: OWL and lack of identifiers

To: Waclaw Kusnierczyk <Waclaw.Marcin.Kusnierczyk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:54:45 -0500
Message-id: <p06230913c2493d96b7a2@[192.168.1.2]>
>Pat Hayes wrote:
>>>  Re: Peter F Brown's post (Sat, 14 Apr 2007 09:35:14)
>>>
>>>  Peter writes:
>>>
>>>  "
>>>  The spec is clear, yesS. but an object is not the same thing as the
>>>  address of the object - (according to the RFC, I *am* my address): the
>>>  object needs identity as much as the address of it does. That is where I
>>>  feel this axiom of the W3C falls downS
>>>  "
>>>
>>>  Clearly there is a problem here.  But we should be careful to
>>>  distinguish confusedly designed frameworks from confused documentation
>>>  of well-designed ones.
>>>
>>>  While RDF specifications, for example, are relatively clear and sound,
>>>  the RDF primer provides an abundance of examples such as:
>>>
>>>  ex:index.html  exterms:creation-date  "August 16, 1999" .
>>>  ex:index.html  dc:language            "en" .
>>>
>>>  supposed to state that "August 16, 1999" is the creation date of a page
>>>  and "en" is he language of a page, while both are literal strings and
>>>  *not* identifiers for a date and a language, respectively.
>>
>>  What??  Why should a string not be an identifier? In fact, it seems to
>>  me that *all* identifiers are strings. And the second example uses a
>>  language tag which is taken from an Internet standard for language
>>  tagging: what could be a better example of an agreed identifier? Why is
>>  this confused?
>
>Hold on.  It is not whether something is a string or not which counts,
>but how it is to be interpreted.  Of course, "August 16" can be an
>identifier for anything you may wish.  But it is a string, not a date.    (01)

Of course it is not a date, but it is (using widely accepted 
conventions) an *identifier* of a date.    (02)

>But as the object of a triple, "August 16" is a literal, not a URI, and
>in RDF, a literal is (supposed to be) self-referential.    (03)

True. But it is an easy extension to the RDF interpretation to go on 
to interpret that string as denoting a date. RDF was always intended 
to be used as part of larger systems of conventions and 
interpretations.    (04)

And this is, after all, an example from a primer. The best way to 
express this in RDF would be to use a typed literal with the xsd:date 
system, which is required to exactly denote a date; but the primer 
had not covered datatyping at this point.    (05)

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    (06)


_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (07)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>