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

Re: Reification - whats best practice?

From: Hamish Harvey <david.harvey@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:59:02 +0100
Message-ID: <412DA656.2080705@bristol.ac.uk>
To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
CC: danbri@w3.org, sandro@w3.org, macgregor@isi.edu, leo@gnowsis.com, www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote:

>     In my published RDF files, I just assert things about the RDF/XML
>     serialized document. Eg. that I'm its dc:creator or foaf:maker. I
>     also like using a wot:assurance property to relate it to the
>     output of the PGP/GPG signing process.
>
>If I'm understanding you right Dan, your approach seems to be
>the same, in essence, as named graphs, where one makes statements
>about the graph, which allows one to infer things about the 
>statements within that graph.
>  
>

Isn't it the same in essence, except for the fact that it's polluting? 
When you start doing that it becomes impossible to differentiate between 
statements about the *graph* and statements about the *rdf document*.

Cheers,
Hamish
Received on Thursday, 26 August 2004 08:59:36 UTC

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