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

Re: lightweight reification (was Representing trust (and other co ntex t) in RDF)

From: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 16:14:25 +0200
Message-ID: <3933CCC1.703B936F@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
To: Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com>
CC: "McBride, Brian" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDF interest group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Graham Klyne wrote:
> >I must appologise for the diagram not being clear.  The intent was to show
> >the whole statement being the subject of the 'asserted by' property which
> >would, I think, be consistent with the RDF model.
> Ah, OK.  Consistent if the statement is reified.

Why should we make a difference between reifying a triple and reifying an arc,
that is :

| S -(P)-> O|         S -(P)-> O
|___________|             |
      |              (assertedBy)
 (assertedBy)             |
      |                   v
      v                Someone

   (fig 1)              (fig 2)

for me, both representation have the same meaning,
even though M&S uses fig.1, I find fig.2 more readable

NB : in fig.2 I'm not annotating property P ! I'm annotating this one arc
(the one labeled with P, going from S to O... looks like a triple, doesn'it ?)


--- Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur
    Whatever is said in Latin sounds important.
Received on Tuesday, 30 May 2000 10:09:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:30 UTC