W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > August 2002

Re: A Rough Guide to Notation3

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 15:53:06 -0700
Message-ID: <00f801c24bc1$031b7e60$657ba8c0@c1457248a.sttls1.wa.home.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: <sandro@w3.org>, <sean@mysterylights.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

From: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

> You could forbid all self-referential sentences.  However, some
> self-referential sentences are interesting, and forbidding any form of
> self-reference goes against the RDF philosophy of being able to say
> anything about anything.

Well, it seems to me, that right now we can't even say in RDF that {<A>
ex:notType <B>} where 'ex:notType' is the negation of 'rdf:type'.  Can we?
If so, how?  If not,  what do you mean that  RDF's has a philosophy of being
able to say anything about anything?

Also, can you privide a single 'interesting' case of ?x and ?y in the form:
   <S1>~{<S1> ?x ?y}
where the '~' indicates that <S1> is the identity of the RDF triple
   {<S1> ?x ?y} ?
I can't think of any.

Seth Russell
http://robustai.net/sailor/
Received on Saturday, 24 August 2002 18:54:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:55 GMT