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: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 16:48:35 -0000
Message-ID: <5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F2394D9@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>
> > The case to be met is that a statement is a triple (s,p,o) which
> > is uniquely defined by its three components.  The exert I just
> > quoted from M&S 4.1 says that a reified statement models a 
> > statement.  Not the stating of a statement.  Current M&S
> > implies therefore that a reified statement is uniquely determined
> > by its subject, predicate and object.
> Yes.  But it doesn't discuss how to handle the problem discussed.
> Your interpretation is logically correct.  But we can change it.  My
> vote is to change it.

So what would it take to build a case to do that and rough
concensus in rdfi in support.  W3C are not going to trash
a recommendation just because we might have done it
differently.  There needs to be a case made.

Seems to me we would need:

  o a concensus interpretation of what m&s actually says
  o a statement of the issue
  o an analysis of the ways of resolving the issue
  o a recommendation

I would expect W3C to be strongly biased in favour
of resolutions that are compatible with the existing
spec, if such resolutions exist.  In this case such
a resolution does exist - propose a new resource
type to represent a stating.

Received on Monday, 20 November 2000 11:48:50 UTC

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