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

Re: reification "subagenda"

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 14 Feb 2002 22:59:51 -0600
To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1013749192.19333.39.camel@dirk>
On Thu, 2002-02-14 at 11:21, Graham Klyne wrote:
> 1. I agree that M&S allows only one statement with given sub, pred, obj.
> 
> 2. M&S may not specifically admit more than one reification of a statement, 
> but it also does not (to me) clearly deny the possibility.

Hmm... that's an angle I hadn't considered.

But how do you reconcile point 2. with text like
  A statement and its corresponding reified statement
? That's pretty clear that they're in 1-1 correspondence,
no?

I'm still trying to decide whether I care enough to
go on record as opposing this decision.
I think the argument we made for removing
aboutEachPrefix applies pretty well to reification.


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2002 23:59:26 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:45:12 EDT