Re: Named graphs etc

> >
> > Maybe it is also helpful in this context to use the statement/stating
> > terminology:
> >
> > 1. RDF Statements don't involve speech acts. So statements are
> > contained in
> > graphs that describe themselves as :G1 x:GraphQualificationProperty
> > x:unasserted or are described somewhere else somehow as unasserted.
>
> Right.
>
> > 2. RDF Stating: Through a speech act a statement becomes a stating. So
> > a
> > stating is the result of an agent claiming a Statement.
>
> Not sure I follow this. Can you provide an example?
>

Taking Pat's "asserting is a speech act", I tried to link the existing
terminology "Statement/Stating" used inconsistently today to your
x:GraphQualificationProperty. I think the term RDF Stating is used mostly,
when speaking about agents claiming stuff in an distributed, "social"
environment. The term RDF Statement more in situations where RDF is just
used as datamodel / knowledge model without taking agents and speech acts
into account. Thinking more about it and seeing that we just discuss the
agent scenario, the idea of somehow linking it with the
x:GraphQualificationProperty doesn't appear that convincing any more ;-(



Thanks for the comment,



Chris