W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > April to June 2002

Re: motivation for bNodes/existentials in RDF; note for parsers

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 09:40:19 -0800
Message-ID: <00e201c1dcc8$f4f74420$657ba8c0@c1457248a.sttls1.wa.home.com>
To: "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Pat Hayes,

I would like an authoritative interpretation of what the MT is telling us
about blank nodes.   In particular if an rdf process reads a bnode from
source A, and copies that node to a source B, but adds a uriref to the node
(making it not blank),  has the process changed the meaning of the node ?
For example:

Source A reads:
_:a  rdf:type :ball
_:a  :hasColor :blue.
_:a  :hasShape :round.
_:a  :ownedBy :Seth.

Source B reads:
<uuid:1615>  rdf:type :ball.
<uuid:1615> :hasColor :blue.
<uuid:1615> :hasShape :round.
<uuid:1615> :ownedBy :Seth.

Is this tantamount to the process A reading  "Seth owns some (maybe only
one) round blue balls."  and copying to B "Seth owns a round blue ball."?
If not, could you change my interpretation ever so slightly to illustrate
just exactly how the process is mutating (if at all) the meaning of the
message?

Seth Russell
Received on Friday, 5 April 2002 12:44:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:30 GMT