W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > December 2003

RE: Trust, Context, Justification and Quintuples

From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 17:40:37 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Cc: "Chris Bizer" <chris@bizer.de>, "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org

At 14:11 20/12/03 +0100, Jos De_Roo wrote:

>Assuming (-- taken from Tarski)
>Whenever, in a sentence, we wish to say something about
>a certain thing, we have to use, in this sentence, not
>the thing itself but its *name* or *designation*.
>(this is also the case when the thing talked about
>happens to be a word or a symbol)
>Every expression should differ (at least in writing)
>from its *name*.
>Forming the *name* of an expression can be done by placing
>it between quotation marks.
>The same thing can have many different *names*.
>and assuming N3's { and } as quotation marks

That (i.e. assuming N3's { and } as quotation marks) is one possible 
approach, but not one that I like.  My thoughts (somewhat incomplete) are at:

>then we at least have one of the different means
>for naming graphs.
>I understand your example
>ID => { < a, b, c >
>          < a1, b1, c1 >
>          < a2, b2, c2 > }
>ID => { < a3, b3, c3 > }
>as giving 1 name to 2 *different* things which I guess
>was not the intention and which is bad of course.

That's not my intention, and it's not what I do.

In my case, I treat this as defining:

ID => { < a, b, c >
          < a1, b1, c1 >
          < a2, b2, c2 >
          < a3, b3, c3 > }

Part of the rationale is based on the equivalence with the quad approach, 
but you have reminded me that this is a *choice* I made, not an inevitable 

BTW, in N3, what do you think this means?:

:id :- { :a  :b  :c  .
          :a1 :b1 :c1 .
          :a2 :b2 :c2 . }

:id :- { :a3 :b3 :c3 . }

(all in a single document.)

>I've never felt the need for more than {triples} names;
>those names are written on documents which have URI's
>and those URI's are the pivotal points.

Er, I'm not following you here


Graham Klyne
For email:
Received on Saturday, 20 December 2003 13:10:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:48 UTC