skip to main content
article

Sense and Reference on the Web

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 May 2011Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We examine a crucial question for the World Wide Web: What does a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) mean? Crucial for the next-generation Semantic Web, can it refer to things outside web-pages? The Web is a universal information space for naming and accessing information via URIs. However, the classical philosophical problems of meaning and reference that have been the source of debate within the philosophy of language return when the Web is given as the foundation for a knowledge representation with the Semantic Web. Debates on the Semantic Web about the meaning and referential status of a URI are explored as analogues to debates about the meaning and reference of names in the philosophy of language. Three main positions are inspected: the logical position, as exemplified by the descriptivist theory of reference, the direct reference position, as exemplified by Putnam and Kripke's causal theory of reference, and a Wittgensteinian position that views URIs as a public language, as exemplified by Web search engines. These positions show that debates within the philosophy of language are alive and well on the Web, and so in the philosophy of computer science.

References

  1. Beckett, D., & Berners-Lee, T. (2008). Turtle--Terse RDF triple language. Member submission, W3C.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Berners-Lee, T. (1994). World Wide Web future directions. Plenary Talk. http://www.w3.org/Talks/WWW94Tim/. Last accessed on October 5, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Berners-Lee, T. (1998). Cool URIs don't change. http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI. Last accessed on November 19, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Berners-Lee, T. (2003a). Message on [email protected] list. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0158.html. Last accessed on May 20, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Berners-Lee, T. (2003b). Message to [email protected]. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0022.html. Last accessed on May 20, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., & Masinter, L. (1998). IETF RFC 2396 Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic syntax. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt. Last accessed on September 15, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., & Masinter, L. (2005). IETF RFC 3986 Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic syntax. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt. Last accessed on April 2, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., & Lassila, O. (2001). The Semantic Web. Scientific American, 284(5), 35-43.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Brin, S., & Page, L. (1998). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine. In Proceedings of the International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW) (pp. 107-117). Brisbane, Australia. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Carnap, R. (1928). The logical structure of the world. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. (Republished in 1967).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Dummett, M. (1993). What is a theory of meaning. In The seas of language (pp. 1-33). Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Originally published in Truth and meaning: Essays in semantics in 1976).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Frege, G. (1892). Uber Sinn und Bedeutung. Zeitshrift fur Philosophie and philosophie Kritic, 100, 25-50. (Reprinted in The philosophical writings of Gottlieb Frege (1956). Oxford: Blackwell. Max Black, Trans.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Grice, P. (1957). Meaning. The Philosophical Review, 66, 377-388.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Guha, R. V., & Lenat, D. (1992). Language, representation and contexts. Journal of Information Processing, 15(3), 340-349. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Guha, R. V. (1996). Meta Content Framework: A white paper. http://www.guha.com/mcf/wp.html. Last accessed August 11, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Halpin, H., & Lavrenko, V. (2009). Relevance feedback between hypertext search and semantic search. In Proceedings of the Semantic Search Workshop at the World Wide Web Conference. Madrid, Spain.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Halpin, H., & Thompson, H. (2005). Web Proper Names: Naming referents on the web. In Proceedings of the Semantic Computing Initiative Workshop at the World Wide Web Conference. Chiba, Japan.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem. Physica D, 42, 335-346. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Hayes, P. (1977). In defense of logic. In Proceedings of international joint conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 559-565). Cambridge, MA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Hayes, P. (2003a). Message to [email protected]. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0147.html. Last accessed on May 20, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Hayes, P. (2003b). Message to [email protected]. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0198.html. Last accessed on May 20, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Hayes, P. (2004). RDF semantics. Recommendation, W3C. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/. Last accessed September 21, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Hayes, P. (2006). In defense of ambiguity. In Proceedings of the identity, reference, and the web workshop at the WWW conference. Edinburgh, Scotland. http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin/irw2006/hayes.pdf. Last accessed on October 5, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Hayes, P., & Halpin, H. (2008). In defense of ambiguity. International Journal of Semantic Web and Information Systems, 4(3), 1-18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Jones, K. S. (1964). Synonymy and semantic classification. Thesis, Cambridge University. (Republished in 1984 by Edinburgh University Press).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Jones, K. S. (1999). Information retrieval and artificial intelligence. Artificial Intelligence Journal, 114, 257-281. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Keller, F., & Lapata, M. (2003). Using the web to obtain frequencies for unseen bigrams. Computional Linguistics, 29(3), 459-484. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Kripke, S. (1972). Naming and necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Luntley, M. (1999). Contemporary philosophy of thought. London, UK: Blackwell.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Needham, R. (1962). A method for using computers in information classification. In Proceedings of the IFIP congress (pp. 284-287). Vienna, Austria.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Oren, E., Delbru, R., Catasta, M., Cyganiak, R., Stenzhorn, H., & Tummarello, G. (2008). Sindice.com: A document-oriented lookup index for open linked data. International Journal of Metadata, Semantics, and Ontologies, 3(1), 37-52. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Putnam, H. (1975). The meaning of meaning. In K. Gunderson (Ed.), Language, mind, and knowledge. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Russell, B. (1905). On denoting. Mind, 14, 479-493.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Searle, J. (1995). The construction of social reality. New York, NY: The Free Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Smith, B. C. (1995). The origin of objects. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Sowa, J. (2006). Review of Language, Cohesion, and Form by Margaret Masterman. Computational Linguistics, 4(32), 551-553. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Tarski, A. (1935). The concept of truth in formalized languages. Studia Philosophia, 1:261-405. (Reprinted in Logic, semantics and metamathematics (1956). Oxford UK: Oxford University Press. J. H. Woodger Trans.).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Tarski, A. (1944). The semantic conception of truth and the foundations of semantics. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 4, 341-375.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Wilks, Y. (2005). A personal memoir: Margaret Masterman (1910-1986). In M. Masterman (Ed.), Language cohesion and form. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Wilks, Y. (2007). Karen Spärck Jones (1935-2007). IEEE Intelligent Systems, 22(3), 8-9. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Wilks, Y. (2008a). The semantic web: Apotheosis of annotation, but what are its semantics? IEEE Intelligent Systems, 23(3), 41-49. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Wilks, Y. (2008b). What would a Wittgensteinian computational linguistics be like? In Proceedings of convention for the society for the study of artificial intelligence and simulation of behavior. Aberdeen, Scotland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations. London, UK: Blackwell Publishers. (Republished 2001, Trans. G. E. M. Anscombe).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Woods, W. (1975). What's in a link: Foundations for semantic networks. In Representation and understanding: Studies in cognitive science (pp. 35-82). Orlando, FL: Academic Press, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in

Full Access