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

What is reification? (was Re: Issue rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr)

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:06:52 -0500
Message-Id: <p0510103fb7fa63d8a761@[205.160.76.193]>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>Brian:
>>  There must be a strong call from the community to make the change. 
>
>I suspect most of the members of the community who understand this issue
>are in the WG.
>
>Brian:
>>  We should resist the temptation to fix things that we don't like but are not
>>  really broken. 
>
>Agreed. This is really broken. Argued elsewhere.
>
>It acts as a significant barrier to the use of the RDF/XML reification
>syntax, and hence as a barrier to the use of reification. If reification
>is a good thing (which is moot, but I think we should assume) then this
>needs fixing.

Well, I wonder if before deciding one way or the other about the 
merits of reification, could we first decide what reification 
actually is? I thought I knew, but at the F2F the model theory I gave 
for reification (which I honestly thought was the blandest and least 
controversial interpretation one could wish for, and to directly 
follow the M&S) seemed to cause a firestorm.  We havn't discussed 
reification since then, but if we are going to start, then please 
lets first define what we are talking about.

Pat


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
phayes@ai.uwf.edu 
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Monday, 22 October 2001 20:07:01 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:41:09 EDT