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

Re: Chainsaw?

From: Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2000 17:06:21 +0000
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001103170226.00e6a960@pop.dial.pipex.com>
To: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@mediaone.net>
Cc: "RDF interest group" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Jonathan,

I for one don't know the answer to your question, but I'm trying to pursue 
some ideas.  In considering and responding to Sergey's comments, I come to 
think we're looking at different facets of the same problem:  I'm focused 
on expressivity (with partial information), you're focused on inference, I 
think.  In the end, I expect we'll find a solution that adequately captures 
both, and hence answers your question.

#g
--

At 01:22 PM 11/2/00 -0500, Jonathan Borden wrote:
> > My interpretation of the second statement is that it says the *bag*
> > containing the statements that define a [FordEscort] is defined by
> > [FordMotorCompany].  My goal is to make that assertion about the (reified)
> > statements themselves.  (Consider, there may be another bag defined by
> > another party containing some of the same statements.)  The nearest thing
> > in the RDF spec is <Description 'aboutEach=...'>, but I find that lacks a
> > corresponding representation in the RDF abstract model.
>
>     And this is the problem. As much as it is good to keep the model as
>simple as is possible, the model needs to model the --isa--> chain properly.
>Part of this is the 'inheritance' of property values in a fashion similar to
>the way an object instance might 'inherit' const values defined as members
>of the class. Usually these const values can be static or class members. So
>the question is, how is this best modelled in RDF?
>
>Jonathan Borden
>The Open Healthcare Group
>http://www.openhealth.org

------------
Graham Klyne
(GK@ACM.ORG)
Received on Friday, 3 November 2000 12:20:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:46 GMT