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

Re: Dark triples, motivating examples

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 18:58:55 -0400
Message-Id: <p0510153db8e25ce10beb@[]>
To: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>
Cc: "RDF-comments" <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
>Aaron says:
>Alright, but do dark triples fix reification?
>Didn't know that reification was broken.  I though it was resolved by the WG
>very nicely.
>Grahm says:
>I think not, because they don't of themselves provide a way to identify a
>statement.  Of course, one can use the reification vocabulary and
>assert(sic) that it's "dark", but I guess that's not what you meant by
>Seth continues:
>I fail to see how the triple refered to by a reification quad is *not* dark
>in the graph which contains it.  For example:
>In a graph containing this reification quad:
>_:1 rdf:type rdf:Statement.
>_:1 rdf:subject foo:S.
>_:1 rdf:predicate foo:V.
>_:1 rdf:object foo:O.
>The triple:
>foo:S foo:V foo:O.
>Is *certainly* dark.

Well, its not even there, so I would say the questions of its 
darkness or lightness don't even arise.

IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2002 18:58:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:15:18 UTC