- From: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
- Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 13:11:25 +0100
- To: Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com>
- CC: ML RDF-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3c.org>
Graham Klyne wrote: > > At 08:26 PM 11/28/00 +0100, Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN wrote: > >This sentence has five words. > >This sentence is in english. > >This sentence begins with "This". > >This sentence talks about itself. > > > >Look at the RDF version of the last example above : > > > > [stidD, stidD, rdf:subject, stidD] > > > >Funny, isn't it ? > >Not very useful, but definitely consistent. I should have precised, I use the syntax [id, s, p, o]... > This in turn caused me to review my thoughts about multiple models for a > given statement. Consider two 'quads': > > [r1, p, s, o] > [r2, p, s, o] > > What are the corresponding RDF triples? I think: > > [p, s, o] > > [r1, rdf:type, rdf:Statement] > [r1, rdf:predicate, p] > [r1, rdf:subject, s] > [r1, rdf:object, o] > > [r2, rdf:type, rdf:Statement] > [r2, rdf:predicate, p] > [r2, rdf:subject, s] > [r2, rdf:object, o] > > Note that the basic triple appears just once, even though it appears in two > quads. This, I think, is roughly what happens when id= is applied to an > RDF property in its XML serialization. > > Actually, the approach I've taken for my contexts ideas is slightly > different: the quad notation actually defines the reification, without > asserting the statement triple. A statement is asserted in a context by an > RDF property that links the reification to the context. That is a question I had : which context does the "linking" statement belong to ? Pierre-Antoine
Received on Saturday, 2 December 2000 07:39:39 UTC