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

Re: new semantics initiative

From: patrick hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 11:41:48 -0500
Message-Id: <p05111a0ab92fcb733d13@[65.217.30.123]>
To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>On 2002-06-12 20:07, "ext patrick hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu> wrote:
>
>>
>>>  At 09:52 AM 6/12/02 +0100, Jan Grant wrote:
>>>
>>>>  Agreed; I'd rather see some syntactic mechanism for darkening (or more
>>>>  generally, colouring*) triples that doesn't rely on URI inspection. In
>>>>  particular, URI inspection doesn't need to be written into the MT
>>>>  documents - it should just appeal to darkness (or otherwise) that's
>>>>  determined through a mechanism external to the document.
>>>
>>>  Speaking personally, me too.  But that does seem to require a syntax
>>>  extension, which may be difficult at this stage.
>>
>>  I really do NOT want to introduce a syntax extension, which
>>  introduces all kinds of extra complexity.
>
>I thought the MT already provided for such a distiction.

I meant, complexity in the syntax documents, Ntriples and so on. This 
whole discussion is trivial form a purely MT point of view.

>  > We have agreed that
>>  contexts are out of scope.
>
>I never proposed contexts.
>
>>  What is wrong with URI inspection?
>
>Because you *CANNOT* know for sure what namespace URI was used
>to generate some term URI by inspecting the term URI. That information
>is iretrievably discarded during parsing.
>
>Get over it folks. It can't be done. Let's please move on and
>consider other, actually possible mechanisms. OK?

Look, we must be in a disconnect here. Are you saying that when some 
software reads some RDF, that it cannot possibly tell that

http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type

is the symbol 'type' on the normative W3C website? You sure seem to 
be saying that. I bow to your expertise, but it seems to me that if 
this is true, then we are in much deeper doo-doo than anything to do 
with dark triples.

><snip>
>Rather, the graph syntax should have an explicit mechanism
>that 'colors' triples as asserted or unasserted,

No, it MUST NOT have such a mechanism. Any such mechanism in the 
graph is inherently non-monotonic. This whole idea is a dead horse.

Pat

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)322 0319   cell
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
Received on Friday, 14 June 2002 12:41:49 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:49:17 EDT