W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2002

Re: reification terminology question

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 10:14:12 +0100
Message-Id: <>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 15:24 24/04/2002 -0500, Pat Hayes wrote:
>Guys, I would like some advise on the preferred terminology to use when 
>discussing reification.
>If we start with a triple
>a b c .
>and reify it, we get a graph of four triples
>_:x rdf:type rdf:Statement .
>_:x rdf:subject a .
>_:x rdf:predicate b .
>_:x rdf:object c .
>1. I think it is correct to refer to the second graph as "a reification" 
>of the first triple, is that right?


>2. Is there a preferred terminology to refer to the bnode which denotes 
>the triple in the reification, ie _:x in this example? (If not, I will 
>have to make one up.)

M&S uses "reified statement".

Received on Thursday, 25 April 2002 09:04:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:57 UTC