Jos, > > > On 22 september 2000 Jonathan Borden wrote: > > This extractor outputs rdf:Statements. > > Nice! Our samples passed. > > > Interestingly, when the result of a transform is itself > > transformed, the statements are reified, hence I call > > this rdfExtractify.xsl > > I think rdf:Statement is axiomatic and should not be > further reified. So reified RDF is invariant after such > transformation (i.e. producing the same graph). I must admit that I am only vaguely aware of the purpose of reification but reading M&S 1.0 http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/#model "Furthermore, the formal specification for reification is: 7. There is an element of Resources, not contained in Properties, known as RDF:Statement. 8. There are three elements in Properties known as RDF:predicate, RDF:subject and RDF:object. 9. Reification of a triple {pred, sub, obj} of Statements is an element r of Resources representing the reified triple and the elements s1, s2, s3, and s4 of Statements such that s1: {RDF:predicate, r, pred} s2: {RDF:subject, r, subj} s3: {RDF:object, r, obj} s4: {RDF:type, r, [RDF:Statement]} " It seems to me that under [9], an <rdf:Statement> which is a triple, is what is being reified. I am confused as to why you suggest that rdf:Statement should not be further reified. Jonathan Borden The Open Healthcare Group http://www.openhealth.orgReceived on Saturday, 23 September 2000 13:10:25 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:44 GMT