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

Re: summary of reification?

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 20:20:21 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020206201601.00abe600@joy.songbird.com>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 06:56 PM 2/6/02 +0000, Brian McBride wrote:
>To my simple mind it boils down to a choice.  Does a reified statement 
>represent a statement or a stating (an occurrence of a statement in a graph).
>
>The formal model part of M&S is clear that its a statement.

Just for the record, I disagree that M&S is clear about this.

>Please lets stay out of the rat holes, choose and move on.

So yes, let's choose -- I feel no M&S precedent for either option.

I think you said the right question before:

>We have to decide on Dan Brickley's equality test.  Does
>
>>  <stmt1> <rdf:type>      <rdf:Statement> .
>>  <stmt1> <rdf:subject>   <subject> .
>>  <stmt1> <rdf:predicate> <predicate> .
>>  <stmt1> <rdf:object>    <object> .
>>
>>  <stmt2> <rdf:type>      <rdf:Statement> .
>>  <stmt2> <rdf:subject>   <subject> .
>>  <stmt2> <rdf:predicate> <predicate> .
>>  <stmt2> <rdf:object>    <object> .
>>
>>  <stmt1> <property>      <foo> .
>>
>>  entail:
>>
>>  <stmt2> <property>      <foo> .

And I think the answer is "no".

#g



------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne                    MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research              <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2002 15:30:10 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:45:06 EDT