## 4 Use of Linguistic Properties in Network Naming Schemes
More impressively, such simple language has introduced the temporal dimension to the conversation specifying that the key was at some location and has indeed been moved (Question 2). After this exchange, hopefully you can get your bicycle key from [PERSON]'s bag, or, more likely, [PERSON] will get it for you, as a bag can be a restricted search domain. In the scenario above, the characters rely on topological descriptors to tell you what might be next to your bicycle key or what it is in. Section 2.2 described how [PERSON] and his collaborators found that topological properties permeate all codifications of place specification in languages. When dealing with computers networks, one has to limit the scope of the questions to a metric space because there is no easy way to have a computer understand the _notion_ of 'near'or 'far'. Metric spaces have the advantage that they satisfy the conditions for topological spaces, allowing us topological reasoning, while giving us numerical values that a computer can handle to deterministically define conditions related to 'near' and 'far'. A metric space is formally defined as an ordered pair \((M,d)\) where \(M\) is a set and \(d\) is a metric on \(M\). In other words, a function  
\[d:MxM\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\]  
such that for any \(x,y,z\in M\), the following holds:  
1. \(d(x,y)\geq 0\),
2. \(d(x,y)=0\iff x=y\),
3. \(d(x,y)=d(y,x)\),
4. \(d(x,z)\leq d(x,y)+d(y,z)\). Function \(d\) is commonly referred to as a distance function. With the definitions established, the questionnaire can be described below:  
**Question 1**. : What is the name \(n\) of the object you want to find? **Question 2**. : Is \(n\)'s location updated over time? **Question 3**. : Is \(n\) part of a metric space \(M_{N},N\in\mathbb{N}\)? **Question 4**. : For every possible object \(n\in M_{N}\), can these objects be located in a single defined metric space \(M_{N-x},x\in\mathbb{N}\)? The questionnaire is of no use unless one can concretely define what it is that one is attempting to find. This is the objective of Question 1, as it forces one to define the figure \(F\). Without defining figure \(F\), one cannot contemplate the definition of a shared ground \(G\). In ICN, a consumer only requests ICN names, so the consumer depends on the network to find where the related chunks are located to satisfy the request. The assumption is made in this dicussion that what needs to be located are chunks related to an ICN name which are the size of the network's Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU). Question 2 is derived from the knowledge of place specification in languages when motion is involved, as described in Section 2.3. Although there are no definite methods to codify motion in languages, the locations \(g_{n}\) of a name \(n\) must be somehow maintained and updated over time. Question 3 asks if a name \(n\) being used in a network naming scheme can be placed in a particular set of names and if these can be categorized so that they can be organized and ordered by a distance function. The ability to do these actions permits forming a notion of 'near' between two names belonging to the same set. Question 4 deals with the scope of the ground \(G\) used by a name \(n\). Section 2.1 discussed the implicit use of the Earth's surface as the ground \(G\) with the largest scope in human languages. From the same section, it is also known that, in human languages, place specification relies on establishing a binary relation between a defined figure \(F\) and a defined ground \(G\), even if \(G\) is only implied by context. This means that the name \(n\) referred to in Question 3 is the \(F\) in the binary relation. This also implies that, in network naming structures, a \(G\) always exists. An interesting implication is that, if it is known that the relation between a \(F\) and a \(G\) is binary, a recursive place specification can be performed such that the \(g_{1}\in G_{1}\) of a \(F_{1}\) can also be seen as the \(F_{2}\) of a \(G_{2}\), where \(G_{2}\) has a different scope when compared to \(G_{1}\).