- From: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 23:12:27 -0500
- To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
- Cc: Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
On Thursday, June 14, 2001, at 06:31 AM, jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com wrote: > We can imagine that anounymous terms are identified 'by their content' I certainly hope not. At least, this is not the way I use anonymous terms. I imagine anonymous terms being equivalent to stating "a term with these properties" not "all terms with these properties". If two people in a room call out that they're thinking of something gray... :Person1 :thinkingOf [ :color :Gray ] . :Person2 :thinkingOf [ :color :Gray ] . ... we cannot conclude that they are both thinking of elephants, or at least of the same thing. One may be thinking of the New York Times and the other of his office building. I think you are smushing prematurely. And the current XML still doesn't have a way to say: _:a :property _:b . _:b :property _:a . nor :x :property _:a . :y :property _:a . If anonymous nodes are part of the abstract syntax (which we seem to have implicitly agreed upon through our acceptance on N-Triples), then this is an issue. -- [ "Aaron Swartz" ; <mailto:me@aaronsw.com> ; <http://www.aaronsw.com/> ]
Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 02:33:02 UTC