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

Re: status update: webont request for dark triples

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 11:07:17 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020429110326.03cf1170@joy.songbird.com>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Without wishing to hijack this debate, in some recent work of mine I have 
noted a possible motivation for dark triples; see 
http://www.ninebynine.org/RDFNotes/RDFForLittleLanguages.htm#xtocid137228

[[
7.4 Implications for "dark triples"

As I write this, the RDF core working group has been giving some 
consideration to "dark triples" (i.e. unasserted triples) in RDF models.

Using RDF graphs to encode my "little languages", I have no idea if the 
corresponding subgraphs are satisfiable in the RDF model theory [10]. 
Practically, this doesn't matter for my applications: they work fine. But 
is there a problem lurking if the same RDF data is used by advanced 
reasoners that make full use of the RDF entailments sanctioned by the model 
theory?

This uncertainty would be banished if the RDF core language explicitly 
recognizes dark triples, and provides a syntactic or other mechanism to 
designate certain statements as "dark triples".
]]

#g
--

At 11:23 AM 4/26/02 +0100, Brian McBride wrote:
>Hi Folks,
>
>The SW coordination meeting discussed webont's request for dark 
>triples.  We had a good conversation, everyone is basically in agreement.
>
>The recorded action in the minutes
>
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-semweb-cg/2002Apr/0039.html
>
>is
>
>[[
>ACTION: Guus, to go back to WebOnt subgroup to clarify requirements and
>produce something in 2 weeks, deliverables include specific examples,
>clarifications, etc. (context http://www.w3.org/2002/04/22-swcg-irc#T17-49-34)
>]]
>
>I understand that 2 weeks may be a bit optmistic, given the web conference 
>in Hawaii.
>
>I'm expecting that with this material we'll have a much better 
>understanding of what the problem is and how it might be fixed.
>
>My thanks go to the webont folks for this action.
>
>Brian
>
>
>

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Monday, 29 April 2002 07:03:52 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:47:38 EDT