- From: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
- Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 20:26:49 +0100
- To: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>, ML RDF-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3c.org>
Seth Russell wrote: > Yes, this is where I need you help; because my proposal allows the > apparently feared ability of a statement to refer to itself. > > [stid5, subjectx, propertyx, stid5] > > I don't believe that Serge's proposal suffers from this ill, but mine > definitely does. Sergey's too ! [stid5, stid5, propertyx, objectx] There is no fundamental difference between subject and object, you can equaly write : [stid6, context1, asserts, stid1] [stid7, stid1, assertedBy, context1] > About [stid5, subjectx, propertyx, stid5] > Isn't there some way that we can make the semantics of this consistent? It depends on the semantics of subjectx and propertyx, but yes, it can definitely be semanticaly consistent : This sentence has five words. This sentence is in english. This sentence begins with "This". This sentence talks about itself. Look at the RDF version of the last example above : [stidD, stidD, rdf:subject, stidD] Funny, isn't it ? Not very useful, but definitely consistent. Pierre-Antoine
Received on Tuesday, 28 November 2000 14:37:12 UTC