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

RE: A triple is not unique.

From: McBride, Brian <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 18:13:06 -0000
Message-ID: <5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F2394CD@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: "'Jonas Liljegren'" <jonas@rit.se>
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>, RDF-IG <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> Yes. That has been suggested before.  But that means that you can't
> use reification in the way examplified in RDF M&S.

Just to be clear, can you point out the specific examples in M&S that
don't work with the statements as facts interpretation.

For the record, section 5, the formal model section of M&S states:

  There is a set called Statements, each element of which is a triple
  of the form {pred, sub, obj}

That says that each Statement is a triple of the form (s,p,o).  A 
triple in mathematics is uniquely determined by its three components.
> My vote is on allowing identical statements with diffrent identities.

Can you clarify what that sentence means :)  How can two identical things
have different identity?  If they  have different identity, they are not

> And you can't avoid that with statements distributed over several
> models over the net.

Different representations of statements.  In my world model, statements
are abstract and don't have a location on the net.  Perhaps yours is 

Received on Sunday, 19 November 2000 13:13:11 UTC

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