On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 09:39:27PM -0400, Jon Phipps wrote: > > This is basically how I view FRBR. And 'bundles of statements' doesn't > > necessarily translate nicely into entities, classes, or even objects. > Without > > those, disjointness doesn't really seem to be much of an issue. > > Right - though they would translate nicely into "named graphs", with > significant practical advantages (provenance, exchange, distributed > maintenance...). > > True! > > disjointness doesn't really seem to be much of an issue. > > To be clear - you mean that if the bundles of statements are not > entities/classes/objects, it doesn't make sense to say they are disjoint, > right? > Right. > > Tom > > -- > Tom Baker <tom@tombaker.org> >
Received on Sunday, 30 October 2011 16:00:48 UTC