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

RE: Statements/Reified statements

From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 22:00:00 -0500
To: "Sergey Melnik" <melnik@db.stanford.edu>
Cc: "ML RDF-interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3c.org>
Message-ID: <002d01c054f9$785db190$0201a8c0@ne.mediaone.net>
Sergey Melnik wrote:
> >
> > <Statement ID="S1">
> >     <predicate resource="bar"/>
> >     <subject resource="foo"/>
> >     <object resource="baz"/>
> > </Statement>
> >
> > <Statement ID="S2">
> >     <predicate resource="asserts"/>
> >     <subject resource="John"/>
> >     <object resource="S1"/>
> > </Statement>
>
> The model I'd generate for this is:
>
> (John asserts (foo bar baz))

Yes but your forgot the fact that I explicitly named the statement "S1" and
"S2", moreover using the ID the statements get a URI which is the base URI
of the document where they are defined and a fragment ID "#S1" e.g.

http://www.openhealth.org/xxx/somedoc.rdf#S1


>
> > > The M&S spec clearly states that statements are *non-atomic*
> entities in
> > > the RDF model, i.e. they have 3 identifiable parts. Why then getting
> > > into trouble of defining another mechanism ("quad reification") for
> > > identifying these same parts in a less efficient (in all
> senses) manner?
> >
> >     In order to assign a URI to a triple.
>
> Why not make it computable if necessary (Skolem)? Can save a lot of
> space...

Fine for anonymous statements, but the whole point is statements that have
an assigned URI, that is I wish to point to where the statement is defined
on the Web using a URI. This is the entire reason to use URIs otherwise we
are simply discussing an assertion database.


Jonathan Borden
The Open Healthcare Group
http://www.openhealth.org
Received on Wednesday, 22 November 2000 21:54:22 GMT

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