W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > August 2004

RE: Reification - whats best practice?

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:32:42 +0300
Message-ID: <1E4A0AC134884349A21955574A90A7A50A1C24@trebe051.ntc.nokia.com>
To: <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of ext Steve Harris
> Sent: 26 August, 2004 11:11
> To: 'RDF interesting groupe'
> Subject: Re: Reification - whats best practice?
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 10:47:13 -0700, Bob MacGregor wrote:
> >    Sandro Hawke wrote:
> > 
> >  The right solution is to use contexts.  Contexts can be implemented
> >  using quads instead of triples, or by using a scheme for
> >  encapsulating groups of statements, as is done in the 
> Triple system.
> >  The DAWG committee is taking baby steps towards contexts by
> >  including a SOURCE element in BRQL.  If you substitute the term
> >  "context" for "source" in a BRQL query, then you have quads.  Some
> >  of us are planning to "abuse" BRQL by treating the sources as if
> >  they are contexts.  I would not be surprised if members of the DAWG
> >  committee have that in mind (but I can't speak for them).
> 
> It is still up in the air wether SOURCE will be included, some of the
> members are not keen on it.

It would be a great pity if it were not included, even as an optional
feature, as there are so many use cases and real-world examples of
relevant usage.

Patrick
Received on Thursday, 26 August 2004 08:33:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:57 UTC