W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > June 2008

Re: RDF/XML shorthand for RDF reification

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:48:45 -0400
Message-Id: <4F72EF85-9333-4989-8A6F-01D8B391BA63@gmail.com>
Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
To: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>


On Jun 25, 2008, at 3:50 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

> The point I was making was that using the shorthand results in the
> reification node having a real name, i.e., not being a blank node,  
> which
> messes up lots of things, including parsing and semantics.

Just for the record, how will it mess up parsing and semantics. All  
of our use of reification is for axioms. As I see it, the difference  
would be whether axioms had names in OWL Full (on the semantics side)  
and on the parsing described in table 6 and 17, which seem like they  
could be adjusted to used named instead of blank nodes.

-Alan

> Therefore,
> arguments that rely on using the shorthand are not applicable, at  
> least
> without doing some investigation to see whether there is a remedy.
>
> This has nothing to do whether one would like to have the base  
> triple or
> not.
>
> peter
>
> From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: RDF/XML shorthand for RDF reification
> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:40:03 -0400
>
>> The point I was making is that it that I though that it was  
>> unreasonable
>> for owl not to have the reified triple, and therefore this is well
>> suited ;-)
>>
>> I also pointed out that it nullified the argument that there was an
>> additional parsing burden to parse the "extra" actual reified  
>> triple. In
>> effect the RDF/XML shorthand makes the parsing burden for a fully
>> reified triple only slightly more than for the triple itself.
>>
>> -Alan
>>
>> On Jun 25, 2008, at 2:15 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> It appears to me that the RDF/XML shorthand for RDF reification  
>>> creates
>>> named reification, i.e., it names the reified triple.  I believe  
>>> that
>>> this means that its use is not reasonable for OWL.
>>>
>>> peter
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2008 21:49:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 June 2008 21:49:35 GMT