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*.

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:52 UTC