W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > July 2012

Re: Why do we name nodes and not edges?

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:11:30 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYh+52pP5OeFd4vNrTiwfnzJ-2hKgQe3vMXqm5kJ18YWwyg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Cc: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>, semantic-web@w3.org
On 25 July 2012 18:08, Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com> wrote:

> Yes, exactly, I was writing in a bit of a hurry, maybe a UUID would make
> made it clearer.
>

Thanks for the responses, is there a standard way to encode

"triple"

into

urn:uuid:triple?

(For the sake of convenience, let's assume we are not dealing with bnodes)


>
> - Steve
>
> On 2012-07-25, at 17:04, Dave Reynolds wrote:
>
> > If I understand Steve's point he was meaning that you can mint a new
> unique edge:xxxxxx identifier for each edge.
> >
> > [Presumably you could make that a subPropertyOf the actual property you
> wanted to assert.]
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Dave
> >
> > On 25/07/12 16:47, Aidan Hogan wrote:
> >> Steve,
> >>
> >> If I understand Melvin's point, in RDF, edge:123456 is the URI of a
> >> property used to label the edge, not the edge itself.
> >>
> >> Analogously, you don't identify a class-instance by it's class URI.
> >>
> >> An edge is between two things. It might be directed and it might be
> >> labelled. In RDF it's both.
> >>
> >> Hence, the edge would encapsulate the full triple, including source
> >> (subject) and target (object) nodes, as well as the label (predicate).
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Aidan
> >>
> >> On 25/07/2012 16:18, Steve Harris wrote:
> >>> Nothing stops you from giving edges a unique URI, infact I think I've
> >>> worked on systems that did that.
> >>>
> >>> e.g.
> >>>
> >>> <foo> <http://example.com/edge/123456> 1 .
> >>> <http://example.com/edge/123456> a rdf:Property .
> >>> ...
> >>>
> >>> - Steve
> >>>
> >>> On 2012-07-25, at 16:07, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Sorry if this topic has been covered before, but I have a question
> >>>> based on the axioms of the web, in particular:
> >>>>
> >>>> *Axiom 0a: Universality 2    Any resource of significance should be
> >>>> given a URI.
> >>>> *
> >>>> In this case we consider the web to be a directed graph (of nodes and
> >>>> edges), where a *node* corresponds to a *resource* but edge does not.
> >>>>
> >>>> We are encouraged to make nodes universal by giving them a URI.
> >>>>
> >>>> Why dont edges get the same treatment, ie encouragment to give it a
> >>>> (universal) name.  Is it even practical?
> >>>>
> >>>> I know there's such thing as reification but that seems to be
> >>>> unpopular (maybe before my time).
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm just curious as to whether this seems asymmetrical, that nodes are
> >>>> seemigly treated in one way, and edges in another?
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Steve Harris, CTO
> >>> Garlik, a part of Experian
> >>> +44 7854 417 874 http://www.garlik.com/
> >>> Registered in England and Wales 653331 VAT # 887 1335 93
> >>> Registered office: Landmark House, Experian Way, Nottingham, Notts,
> >>> NG80 1ZZ
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> Steve Harris, CTO
> Garlik, a part of Experian
> +44 7854 417 874  http://www.garlik.com/
> Registered in England and Wales 653331 VAT # 887 1335 93
> Registered office: Landmark House, Experian Way, Nottingham, Notts, NG80
> 1ZZ
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2012 16:11:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:35 UTC