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

Re: Provenance in RDF

From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 18:11:14 +0000
Message-ID: <3C7D2142.340E904@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: "Hutchison, Nigel" <Nigel.Hutchison@softwareag.com>
CC: "RDF Interest (E-mail)" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Agreed.

Jena can also do this as it happens - it currently treats Statements as
subclasses (in the java sense) of Resources and so can have URIs and can be
explicitly referred to. This is controversial.

I call this "out of band" because, whilst we can do it at the programming level
easily enough, it is hard to reflect it in the existing RDF/XML or Ntriple
syntax other than by reification. The nearest offcial syntax support we have is
"bagID" which not only implies reification but adds an extra bag indirection. 

Dave

"Hutchison, Nigel" wrote:
> 
> Another way of doing out of band provenance would be to treat the statement
> itself as a resource.
> 
> Suppose every statement had a URI (U say)
> 
> then we have
> 
> U===> subj --pred--> obj   (U references this statement as a resource)
> for any provenanced (is that a word? :-) values use:
>    U --pv:creator--> "Dave"
>    U --pv:date--> "27/2/02"
> 
> The RDF API would have to have a method that returned the (unique) URI of
> each statement.
> 
> Or is this totally out of band .-) It should work ok with our RDF
> implementation but that's no excuse
> 
> regards
> 
> Nigel Hutchison
> 
> Nigel W.O Hutchison
> Chief Scientist
> Software AG
> Uhlandstr 12,D-64297 Darmstadt, Germany
> +49 6151 92 1207
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2002 13:11:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:53 GMT