- From: Sampo Syreeni <decoy@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 19:16:41 +0300 (EEST)
- To: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
- cc: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, RDF Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, RDF Logic <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Jonathan Borden wrote: >Sure if we accept N3 this is no problem but that's the point: N3 >formulas, when represented as triples, use collections of unasserted >triples. If I'm not entirely mistaken, Patrick is suggesting that all those unasserted N3 triples (that is, inner contexts) be modelled as RDF-reified -- and as such, unasserted -- triples. One could then use those as a pure data model to carry semantics which a higher layer, such a OWL, could interpret according to its own rules. The rule Patrick gave interprets a log:implies between two sets of reified statements as asserting the second set when the first set is satisfied among the currently asserted triples at the basis RDF level. Granted, the rule was coded in N3, utilizing N3 contexts. But it needn't be. It's quite likely that the rule wouldn't in fact be spelled out at all in an OWL app, or if it was, it would be modelled entirely as a bunch of reified statements (and maybe Containers linking them into something resembling N3 contexts). AFAICS, this *is* a solution, but an extremely ugly and bloated one. Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - mailto:decoy@iki.fi, tel:+358-50-5756111 student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front openpgp: 050985C2/025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2
Received on Monday, 24 June 2002 12:16:51 UTC