Hi Simon,
I agree with you completely :) 40 yards is a length, 5.28 seconds is a duration, 1 million USD is a value. In which case, there need only be ever one URI that is the identity for the length “40 yards” or the value “1 million USD”. However, if you say that 40 yards is actually a height in some instances, and a width in others, now it is specific to a particular orientation of a particular object and you need different identities for each Dimension / Monetary Amount. Hence, given Martin’s statement that height is a p2_has_type addition to a Dimension, I could equivalently have Types of Starting Price, Hammer Price, Estimated Price, Paid Amount and so on in the Auction use case. Making those Monetary Amounts tied exclusively to the Auction. And hence my assertion that this is not “just” an implementation detail, but an ontological design choice. Rob On 1/18/17, 8:45 AM, "Simon Spero" <[email protected]> wrote: It makes a difference *to the model* for the relationship between Linguistic Objects and Monetary Amounts. For example, if the researchers for a particular sale conclude from a newspaper article that the final auction hammer price was $1M for the painting, is it that the Linguistic Object refers to the Monetary Amount as the generic face value of any old million dollars, or is it explicitly the million dollars that was the sale price? I find it difficult to interpret the use of the term 'price' as referring to anything other than a dimensioned value, rather than a specific payment event involving the transfer of some specific assets. It's analogous to a report stating that Tom Brady has a 40 yard dash time of 5.28 seconds, but Ben Roethlisberger has a 40 yard dash time of 4.75 seconds. Although, because these are the results of measurements, we can infer the existence of two specific intervals of time, and two specific patches of ground, this is irrelevant to the report. Also, suppose that instead of a hammer price of $1M, there had been a reserve price of $2M, and the highest bid was $1M. Then consider the counterfactual sentence "Had the reserve price not been $2M, the hammer price would have been $1M."... Is it possible to compare the hypothetical hammer price to the reserve price? Does this require an implicit conversion between two radically different things? In the original scenario, at the time that the hammer fell, the precise assets to be used to make the payment are not known. Suppose the buyer refuses to pay, and is sued for $1M plus interest for the breach of contract. What do the various tokens of "$1M" that would occur in the complaint refer to? On What is the interest calculated? Simon
