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

Re: unreification

From: Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:21:35 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: Bill dehOra <BdehOra@interx.com>
Cc: "'www-rdf-interest@w3.org'" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
At 12:58 PM 11/16/00 +0000, Bill dehOra wrote:
>         S'      :[s, p, o].

>         S''     :[Rx, rdf:type, rdf:Statement]
>         S'''    :[Rx, rdf:subject, s]
>         S''''   :[Rx, rdf:predicate, p]
>         S'''''  :[Rx, rdf:object, o]

I'll take a stab at this question too:


I think that viewing reification as a process is unhelpful.  I think it's 
more helpful to view it as a relationship, as in:

      X reifies Y


As far as I can tell, statements are used in two distinct ways:
(a) They are quoted
(b) They are asserted

 From your example, { S'', S''', S'''', S''''' } correspond to (a), a 
quotation, and S' corresponds to (b), an assertion.

[[[There may be more, such as:  a statement may be asserted to be 
false.  But RDF doesn't support this directly.  Rather, additional 
constructions based on quoted statements are used (see 


Graham Klyne
Received on Friday, 17 November 2000 12:30:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:33 UTC