W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > May 2003

Re: restrictions bnodes

From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 11:54:49 +0100 (BST)
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
cc: graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0305091147280.13980-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

On Fri, 9 May 2003, Brian McBride wrote:

>
> Jan, Graham,
>
> A couple of questions:
>
> a) Were you aware of the restrictions on bnodes (individuals can't be
> objects of > 1 triple, and no cycles of individuals) from your review of AS+S?

Yes, this is a consequence of the wording in section 4.2


> b) Do you consider such restrictions significant?

They're significant, but not showstoppers, I think - at least, that's
what I _thought_, because I was focussing on the use of RDF to express
OWL DL. Looking at the reverse process (going from RDF graphs to the
abstract syntax), it does appear that the idiomatic use of bnodes that
characterise the RDFS applications I've seen thus far (I'm talking about
grassroots stuff like FOAF) doesn't fit well here. That is, I'm coming
around to the point of view that this is maybe more of an issue than it
might at first appear.




-- 
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/
YKYBPTMRogueW... you try to move diagonally in vi.
Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 06:56:20 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:57:29 EDT