W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > December 2000

RE: Statements/Stating: a proposition

From: McBride, Brian <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 12:29:37 -0000
Message-ID: <5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F2395A8@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: ML RDF-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3c.org>
> "McBride, Brian" wrote:
> > I really don't understand why folks are so reluctant
> > to accept that statements and their occurrences are
> > two different concepts and need different resources
> > to model them.  What is the big deal?
> 
> I do not know any people on the list reluctant to consider 
> that, even me as you suggest :)

Oops.  Sorry Pierre-Antoine.  I did not mean to be rude.
Dashed a response off too quickly.

> I think we all agree that Statements and Statings are 
> different things, and must be represented by different 
> resources.

Yup - me being wrongheaded.

> The problem is: RDF M&S only provides one 
> representation (the reified statement) without explicitely 
> stating which one (from the Statement or the Stating) it represents...
> 
> <flame shield> I know that some of us think that it *is* 
> explicit enough, but anyway there is a debate </flame shield>
> 
> > Pierre-Antoine's proposal uses a reified statement to
> > represent both a statement and a stating.  My concern
> > is that this can lead to contradictions.
> 
> Yes, but *not* the Stating of the *same* Statement !

You are right.  But fundamentally a resource is still representing
two different things, so a contradiction is possible.  All
that is needed is a property that is true of one and not the other.

My example was too simple, but was trying to make the point more
clearly.  And failed :(  


> 
>  [Pierre-Antoine said [Bush won Election]]
> 
> is a statement (I said something), but also a stating (of the 
> statement "Bush won the Election").

So let S be [Bush, won, the election] and RS a reified statement
representing it.  Let S occur in http://foo.

Let T be [RS, occursIn, http://foo] and RT a
refied statement representing it.  T occurs in http://bar.

If I understand you correctly:

RT represents both the statement T and the occurrence of S
in http://foo.  Have I got that right yet?  


Is [RT, occursIn, http://bar] true?  
It is true of the statement T, but not of the stating of S.

Brian 
Received on Thursday, 21 December 2000 07:29:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:47 GMT