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

Re: unreification

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 09:38:02 -0800
Message-ID: <3A141B79.D3B8D6BA@robustai.net>
To: "'www-rdf-interest@w3.org'" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Bill dehOra wrote:

> Can I assume that any removal operation above has the side effect of
> removing other statements (the four added triples)?

I don't think so.  If I say something, then you comment on my assertion, then I
forget what I said,  your comment still exists in all its glory.    In fact
this can of worms, you just opened, might just be the only reason that the 4
statement method of reification might be necessary.  Otherwise we could more
easily reify by just giving each sentence an ident:

[ident1, s, p, o]
[ident2, Rx, reifies, ident1]
[ident3, Rx, isA, Lie]

but then if  ident1 gets forgotten, ident3 suddenly forgets what it's all about
(yuck).

Seth Russell
Received on Thursday, 16 November 2000 12:36:35 GMT

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