- From: Garrett Wollman <wollman+semantic-web@bimajority.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:19:58 -0500
- To: Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>
- Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
<<On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 10:32:15 -0500, Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org> said: > Hear! hear! It seems to me that quads are mainly an implementation > mechanism, and there's a need to agree on the details of "for what?" and > "how?" they will be used. The argument that I've made, perhaps insufficiently clearly, is that every statement ought to have a name (preferably assigned in such a way that the publisher of the statement doesn't need to generate it herself). Given that, I can then write statements about the statements you have published, even if you didn't use explicitly reify them yourself. It might be useful for this name to have some well-defined relationship to the URI where the statement was found, but this is not strictly necessary: if every statement has a name, then an RDF processor can manufacture triples "<name> readFrom <uri>" iff the application requires. -GAWollman
Received on Tuesday, 21 March 2006 16:20:19 UTC