W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > July 2001

Re: rdfms-graph: Food for thought

From: Stephen Petschulat/CanWest/IBM <spetschu@ca.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:41:37 -0700
To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@baltimore.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFCD4D766E.D0BFBE07-ON88256A8B.005AC5B0@mkm.can.ibm.com>

The use case I have in mind is a metadata repository where new resources
are constantly being added, but they may be 'tagged' at a later time. In
this case, an empty

<rdf:description about="urn:myscheme:some_object_id">
</rdf:description>

would indicate that the resource urn:myscheme:some_object_id is a part of
the current domain of discourse, but nothing has been said about it. So the
resource is flagged as one that needs someone to meta-tag it. Of course,
there are many other ways to solve this such as meta-meta info to indicate
the tagging information, but this isn't reason enough to explicitly
disallow it...

cheers,

- steve

Stephen Petschulat



                                                                                                                       
                    Graham Klyne                                                                                       
                    <Graham.Klyne@balt       To:     Stephen Petschulat/CanWest/IBM@IBMCA                              
                    imore.com>               cc:     w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org                                             
                                             Subject:     Re: rdfms-graph: Food for thought                            
                    16/07/2001 05:36                                                                                   
                    AM                                                                                                 
                    Please respond to                                                                                  
                    Graham Klyne                                                                                       
                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                       



At 10:55 AM 7/13/01 -0400, Stephen Petschulat/CanWest/IBM wrote:
>Agreed. Note that it brings the Subject into the RDF graph... the lack of
>arcs itself can be meaningful.

Really?

That (i.e. "the lack of arcs itself can be meaningful") goes against my
understanding of RDF.

#g


------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne                    Baltimore Technologies
Strategic Research              Content Security Group
<Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>    <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
                                 <http://www.baltimore.com>
------------------------------------------------------------



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended
for the addressee(s) only.  If you have received this message in error or
there are any problems please notify the originator immediately.  The
unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is
strictly forbidden. Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for
direct,
special, indirect or consequential damages arising from alteration of the
contents of this message by a third party or as a result of any virus being

passed on.

This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by
Baltimore MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including
computer viruses.
Received on Monday, 16 July 2001 12:46:56 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:38:11 EDT