Hi Rich, On 04/08/2013 02:08 PM, Rich Cooper wrote:
Dear David,You wrote: 1. Owen's URI definition will always be ambiguous. There will always exist a property p such that neither p nor its negation are entailed by the URI definition. While true, this leaves out the subjective part; Aster might believe, without the addition of a new property p, that Owen's URI means one thing, while Albert believes a different interpretation of Owen's URIfrom Aster's. While adding a new property (which can always be done IMHO) makes it mathematically clear, I would like to emphasize that the individual Observer (Aster, Albert, Algernon,Argentium,or whoever)alsomakes an individual interpretation which can be different an arbitrary other Observer. I believe the history of group actions taken on "standards" shows that the individual is the source of most divergence in interpretations.
Yes, that sounds like a pretty good characterization of what I was trying to say: that different parties (knowingly or unknowingly) make different assumptions about the interpretations that will be applied to the data.
David Booth
