W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > February 2004

Re: Named graphs etc

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:13:10 -0600
Message-Id: <p06001f14bc64577d7c64@[10.0.100.76]>
To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ihmc.us>, <www-archive@w3.org>, <chris@bizer.de>, "ext Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
>On Feb 23, 2004, at 17:32, ext Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>I have been being beaten up further from the pragmatic wing  by Chris
>>Bizer - He is beginning to convince me ...
>>
>>
>>My understanding of his key arguments is as follows:
>>
>>- use vocab as much as possible, not syntactic mechanisms
>>     : impacts graphset tag name
>>               asserted attribute
>
>Fair enough. Though we could consider the attribute value as
>a short hand, which generates a second anonymous graph containing
>the statement about assertion of the first graph.
>
>We may, though, end up with an infinite recursion. I.e., we have
>a graph X that is asserted. In order to say that X is asserted,
>we have to have another graph X' containing a statement that
>X is asserted. But if X' is also asserted, we have to have another
>graph X'' with a statement saying that X' is asserted, etc., etc.

Lewis Carroll was there first:

http://www.lewiscarroll.org/achilles.html

>
>???


Nah, don't worry about it. Once you assert something, its asserted. 
You don't need to assert the assertion.

Pat


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC	(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501			(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Thursday, 26 February 2004 21:13:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:39 GMT