W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > April to June 2001

Re: I am he and you are me and we can all ID together

From: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 15:37:20 -0500
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>, Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
CC: RDF Comments <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B700C22D.951D%aswartz@upclink.com>
Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote:

> <rdf:Description>
>   <foo:bar rdf:ID="b" bar:foo="c"/>
> </rdf:description>
> 
> In this case the ID identifies the resource which is the object
> of the foo:bar property.

Ooh, that's terribly messy. I hadn't thought of that.

[Aside: (To Art and others, SiRPAC interprets this as a reification, not as
an ID of the object.) Hmm, sometimes I really wish that RDF didn't have all
of these messy edge cases! Perhaps RDF Core could specify a subset of
"Simple RDF"? That would be really nice...]

However, the example you show is unambiguous, as far as I can tell.

> The issue you are raising, as I currently understand it, is that the
> text:

>> Within propertyElt (production [6.12]), the URI used in a resource attribute
>> identifies (after resolution) the resource that is the object of the
>> statement (i.e., the value of this property). The value of the ID attribute,
>> if specified, is the identifier for the resource that represents   the
>> reification of the statement.

> appears to state the value of the ID attribute on a property element ALWAYS is
> the reified statement, but this is contradicted later by the text you quoted
> in your original submission:

>> r2 is the resource named by the resource attribute if present or a new
>> resource. If the ID attribute is given it is the identifier of this new
>> resource.

> Do let me know if I have not understood the issue correctly.  This is
> the reason I try to respond to each issue raised - to make sure that
> these tired old neurons of mine haven't misfired.

Heh, I believe that does cover the issue, although my sleep-deprived neurons
may have misfired too. Dave, could you look this over and make sure that you
agree?

-- 
Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>| ...schoolyard subversion...
  <http://www.aaronsw.com>   |  because school harms kids
AIM: JediOfPi | ICQ: 33158237|  http://aaronsw.com/school/
Received on Monday, 16 April 2001 16:38:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:28 GMT