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

Re: A triple is not unique.

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 12:47:10 -0800
Message-ID: <3A183C4E.C846E06B@robustai.net>
To: Bill de hÓra <dehora@acm.org>, RDF-IG <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Bill de hÓra wrote:

> : The triples in my computer are different from the triples in
> : your computer.
> Pedantic perhaps, but do you mean "Model" instead of "computer"?

I was trying to pick a collection of statements for which I was assured that the assumption that a triple was unique could not be made.   I was trying to pick a collection of statements which reflects the open ended nature of the semantic web.  I know RDF statements are only meaningful within semantic islands (i love that term, did you coin it?);  yet RDF dose not prescribe how these islands are to be defined.  (Does it?)

> I like to think that I could have a Model independent of location ...

I'd like to think you couldn't, cause then you would be God.  But you have suggested some philosophical questions:  Where is the semantic web?  Does it resides in our many computers or in some abstract imagined space?  I think the semantic web only works within the communications between semantic islands, but i don't think those islands float free of the computers in which they reside - however much we would like that to be the

> Only maybe. I might have [seths_model, states, [reified triple...]].

Yes, I agree.  That and the rest of your examples work for me.

> It seems difficult to pose triples as unique since triples aren't members of the set of things that have uris, namely resources. You need a programmatic context.

Ok you need running applications before this stuff becomes meaningful.  My questions relate to how those applications talk externally between each other.

Seth Russell
Received on Sunday, 19 November 2000 15:45:14 UTC

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