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

Re: reification test case

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2002 20:17:29 +0200
To: ext Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B8834B59.CFFC%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
On 2002-02-03 19:46, "ext Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote:

> We have to decide on Dan Brickley's equality test.  Does
> 
> _:s1 <rdf:type>      <rdf:Statement> .
> _:s1 <rdf:subject>   <subject> .
> _:s1 <rdf:predicate> <predicate> .
> _:s1 <rdf:object>    <object> .
> 
> _:s2 <rdf:type>      <rdf:Statement> .
> _:s2 <rdf:subject>   <subject> .
> _:s2 <rdf:predicate> <predicate> .
> _:s2 <rdf:object>    <object> .
> 
> _:s1 <property>      "property" .
> 
> entail:
> 
> _:s2 <property>      "property" .
> 
> Brian

No.

To explain this with a practical case in point,
consider that <property> is in fact <authority>
or <source>. Properties ascribed to the statement
bNode are regarding a particular instance of
the reified statement. There may be more than one
source and/or authority for what is essentially
the same expression of knowledge. The bNode of
the reification gives us the placeholder by which
to associate such qualifications.

The fact that two or more reified statements share
an intersection of S, P, and O values does not
mean that the two statement bNodes should be merged
or that they share properties.

At least that's my take on it.

Cheers,

Patrick

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Sunday, 3 February 2002 13:17:05 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:45:02 EDT