Re: [RDF] Re: tracing statement origin (was Re: I have a trouble with The RDF Model)

[plea: can we keep this RDF model discussion on just one list - the
RDF Interest Group list - RDF-IG?  I'm getting 2-3 copies of every
message in these threads.  RDF-IG is the main RDF list.]


>>>Gabe Beged-Dov said:
<snip/>

There seem to be some slight typos in your example:

> Below is an explicitly labelled example and the resulting
> statements that are obtained by applying the StatementBag and
> Statement reification algorithm. I've included a typedNode shorthand
> on the first top-level resource for variety. 
> 
> ==============================================
> 
> http://somedoc.rdf:
> 
> <typedNode rdf:ID="res1" rdf:bagID="stat_bag1">
>   <prop1 rdf:ID="stat1">
>     <rdf:Description rdf:ID="res2" rdf:bagID="stat_bag2">
>        <prop2 rdf:ID="stat2">a value</prop2>
>     </rdf:Description>
>   </prop1>
> </typedNode>
> 
> <rdf:Description rdf:ID="res3">
>   <prop2 rdf:ID="stat3">another value</prop3>
> </rdf:Description>


The last one probably should be
  <rdf:Description rdf:ID="res3" rdf:bagID="stat_bag3">
    <prop3 rdf:ID="stat3">another value</prop3>
  </rdf:Description>

i.e. introducing stat_bag3 mentioned below and ending prop3 correctly

And the resulting file (when given rdf:RDF wrapper) parses OK with
Redland+Repat and produces pretty-much the following triples (same
count, didn't check they were exactly identical).

> 
> ==============================================
> 
> Ground statements:
> 
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#res1, prop1, http://somedoc.rdf#res2]
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#res1, rdf:type, typedNodeURI]
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#res2, prop2, "a value"]
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#res3, prop2, "another value"]
> 
> Reified Statement resources:
> 
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#stat1, rdf:type, rdf:Statement]
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#stat1, rdf:subject, http://somedoc.rdf#res1]
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#stat1, rdf:predicate, prop1]
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#stat1, rdf:object, http://somedoc.rdf#res2]
> 
>   I couldn't explicitly label the next statement with a statement ID 
>   since it occurred indirectly in the source document. The processor
> has 
>   generated an ID for it, in this case "genid1".
> 
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#genid1, rdf:type, rdf:Statement]
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#genid1, rdf:subject, http://somedoc.rdf#res1]
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#genid1, rdf:predicate, rdf:type]
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#genid1, rdf:object, uriForTypeNode]
> 
>   [ reification for stat2 ]
> 
>   [ reification for stat3 ]
> 
> Bags representing the Descriptions in the source:
> 
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#stat_bag1, rdf:type, rdf:Bag]
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#stat_bag1, rdf:_1, http://somedoc.rdf#genid1]
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#stat_bag1, rdf:_2, http://somedoc.rdf#stat1 ]
> 
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#stat_bag2, rdf:type, rdf:Bag]
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#stat_bag2, rdf:_1, http://somedoc.rdf#stat2 ]
> 
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#stat_bag3, rdf:type, rdf:Bag]
>   [http://somedoc.rdf#stat_bag3, rdf:_1, http://somedoc.rdf#stat3 ]


Is the above:

  Happening because you explicity added bagID attributes to every
  typedNode / Description (/container?)  [True, in existing apps.]

  Happens anyway with generated IDs anyway when you don't give bagIDs
  [Not necessarily true in current apps.]

or you are proposing that this is the interpretation?  I do like
these ideas and would support that, as a standard interpretation.

<snip topic="ModelAccess" />

Dave

Received on Tuesday, 28 November 2000 06:06:01 UTC