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: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:53:13 -0800
Message-ID: <3A1AD2A9.4B4DDA8A@robustai.net>
To: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>
CC: Dan Brickley <Daniel.Brickley@bristol.ac.uk>, RDF-IG <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Sergey Melnik wrote:

> - every statement has a unique ID generated using a Skolem function
> reify(s, p, o).
> - the reification mechanism described in the specification (or any other
> we come up with) is syntactic;
>   the parser will substitute the value of reify(s, p, o) for the
> identifier used in the serialization.
>
> A triple is unique.

Ahh .. now were getting to the meat of the issue.

If we do it the way you prescribe above, then yes "A triple is unique".   But
my stating now that [Bush wonThe Election] is certainly different from (not
identical to) the Electoral College stating [Bush wonThe Election].  Certainly
the context of utterance is what gives a triple its unique identity.  I think
I stand on firm ground when I say that.  [Word&Object]  So if a triple is to
represent a unique entity ("A triple is unique"), then we would need to
Skolemize the entire node, the nodes to which it arcs and the nodes that arc
to it.

I disagree:  a triple is not unique.

<exerpt
    source="access://robustai.net/MyMemory/seth/?context=Quine"
    format="mime/topic">
topic: Quine
isA: philosopher
properName: Willard Van Orman Quine
homePage: http://hometown.aol.com/drquine/wv-quine.html
bio: http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Quine.html
authorOf: Word&Object
authorOf: The Ways of Paradox and other essays
authorOf: Philosophy of Logic
authorOf: From a Logical Point of View

topic: Word&Object
purchaseAt: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0262670011/
</exerpt>

Seth Russell
Received on Tuesday, 21 November 2000 14:51:16 GMT

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