RE: Anonymous predicate

As just another kind of anonymous resource this makes sense, but I'm
wondering just how useful this might be. Ok, it can be reasoned with by
treating it as a resource, (e.g. 'does this property have a label?') but
beyond that I can't see much benefit. I may be entirely wrong, but I can't
offhand think of what one might do with the information. e.g. I have a cat
with [something] Garfagnana. Knowing the label seems a bit of a red
herring - are two properties with the same label the same property? - not
necessarily. (also - is there anything to stop a resource having more than
one label?  I guess not, can't remember offhand, it would make a lot of
difference).

This idea does open up an interesting area though - what about anonymous
statements & reification?

---

Danny Ayers
<stuff> http://www.isacat.net </stuff>

>-----Original Message-----
>From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
>[mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Sandro Hawke
>Sent: 28 January 2002 18:20
>To: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN
>Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
>Subject: Re: Anonymous predicate
>
>
>
>> I was just wondering if the following was valid N3
>>
>> @prefix foo: <...>
>> @prefix rdfs: <...>
>> foo:MySubject [ rdfs:label "A useful property". ] foo:MyObject.
>>
>> In other words :
>> can the predicate of a statement be an anonymous resouce / bNode ?
>>
>> I think it could proove useful. For example, as my N3 sample suggests, I
>> could write a triple without knowing the exact URI of the predicate, but
>> knowing its label.
>
>My n3 parser will happily turn that into
>
>  foo:MySubject _:g1 foo:MyObject.
>  _:f1 rdfs:label "A useful property".
>
>and I imagine cwm will too.
>
>And if you're just going to assert it, that's the same as saying
>
>  foo:MySubject <uuid:1e7743c8-1413-11d6-8f15-0050ba4812a6> foo:MyObject.
>  <uuid:1e7743c8-1413-11d6-8f15-0050ba4812a6> rdfs:label "A useful
>property".
>
>The real question is whether that will do what you want in most/all
>systems.   Will it in all the edge cases?
>
>       -- sandro
>

Received on Tuesday, 29 January 2002 06:59:13 UTC