I guess what surprises me is your use of "can't" in "We can't produce ..."
instead of "shouldn't", as in "We shouldn't produce high fidelity descriptions of
things that aren't unambiguosly identified, because if we do, there will
be no reliable way to merge descriptions from different sources."
I think it's obvious that we "can" since we do it all the time. That we
shouldn't may be true, although it is, I think you'll agree, a contested
claim.
Joel.
On Tue, 9 Nov 2010, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 11/9/10 5:04 PM, joel sachs wrote:
A URI is just an Identifier. We can't "Describe" what isn't unambiguously
Identified (Named);
Kingsley,
I think we can, though we might not be properly understood, e.g. "Kingsley
was great in Gandhi and Sexy Beast."
Wasn't this part of the summer's argument regarding literals as
rdf:subjects , i.e.
Joel,
Let me be a little clearer re. my statement:
We can't produce high-fidelity descriptions of "Things" (Entities) if the
description Subjects aren't unambiguously Identified.
I believe, via Linked Data, we are seeking to produce high-fidelity Linked
Data meshes that scale.
English is but one of several syntaxes.
Global scale is an integral goal of the mission, Methinks.
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen President& CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
