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

RE: Trust, Context, Justification and Quintuples

From: David Menendez <zednenem@psualum.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 17:21:28 -0500
To: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Cc: "Graham Klyne <gk" <gk@ninebynine.org>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-ID: <r02000200-1031-30B1CBDD34CD11D89C50000393758032@[]>

Jos De_Roo writes:

> Using <uri-of-some-set-of-triples> as an example
> was misleading. We normally identify the *document*
> on which the rdf formula is written and so it would
> have been better when I would have used
> <uri-of-some-rdf-document> and then I still think
> that we *call* some-set-of-triples
> <uri-of-some-rdf-document>!log:semantics

Does <uri-of-some-rdf-document> indicate a resource available through
the web? If so, is the assumption that log:semantics may relate the same
resource to different graphs over time?

For example, Alice might post a FOAF profile at
<http://example.com/alice>, leading to this data:

    <http://example.com/alice> log:semantics {
        _:a rdf:type foaf:Person.
        _:a foaf:mbox <mailto:alice@example.com>.
        _:a foaf:name "Ailce".

The next day, she fixes the typo, and we get:

    <http://example.com/alice> log:semantics {
        _:a rdf:type foaf:Person.
        _:a foaf:mbox <mailto:alice@example.com>.
        _:a foaf:name "Alice".

This means we can't treat <http://example.com/alice>!log:semantics as an
identifier of a specific graph, because it indicates different graphs at
different times.
David Menendez <zednenem@psualum.com> <http://www.eyrie.org/~zednenem/>
Received on Monday, 22 December 2003 17:21:06 UTC

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