Re: Statements/Reified statements

>>>Graham Klyne said:
> At 09:51 AM 11/23/00 +0100, Jonas Liljegren wrote:

<snip/>

> >This means that instead of four, we have five:
> >
> >{ uri, pred, subj, obj, model }
> 
> I considered that approach for [1], but have preferred to use properties to 
> create the association between statement-resource and context (model).  The 
> above approach allows a given statement to be associated with only one 
> context/model, where properties allow a given statement-resource to be 
> incorporated into any number of contexts/models.  That seems very much more 
> in line with the RDF philosophy of "anyone can say anything about anything".

Yes, that's the way I plan to *implement* in Redland i.e. add these quads:
  (subject, predicate, object, <Statement Identifier>}
  (<Statement Identfier>, isInModel, <Model Identifier>)

and similarly for other things like better container support.

However, this doesn't say whether <Statement Identifier> is a visible
external URI and whether the first quad stands for the statement,
reified statement, both, or either.  And even if you could decide
those, does the statement have a truth value, making it a fact?

I wonder if a more formal published proposal (web page), refutation and
discussion of proposals might help us move things along here.

Dave