- From: Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it>
- Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 12:16:53 +0200
- To: danny.ayers@gmail.com
- CC: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Bob MacGregor <macgregor@isi.edu>, Leo Sauermann <leo@gnowsis.com>, 'RDF interesting groupe' <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
I should have known better to post before checking for follow-ups - what a thread! So www-rdf-interest has re-energised, and reification/contexts/quads is the One True Permathread. Danny Ayers wrote: > Dan Brickley wrote: > >> This is a bit of a hack, but in the noble tradition of adding a layer of >> indirection to solve a problem. Instead of talking directly about >> triples or a graph, you talk about (using whatever RDF vocab you find >> appropriate) a document that has that stuff written in it. >> >> > > Hmm, how would you say the resource/representations divide lines up > against named graphs? Is it safe to partially collapse the indirection > and say the graph (in the document) is a representation of the > resource? I suppose what I'm wondering about is how you would describe > the indirection for reasoning purposes (without disappearing into a > reified black hole). > > Cheers, > Danny. > -- Raw http://dannyayers.com
Received on Friday, 27 August 2004 10:20:56 UTC