W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > February 2005

Re: missing bit of RDF for XML people

From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 14:50:52 +0100
Message-Id: <badb33203f5a1daa9feaebdc291ca6cb@bblfish.net>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>

On 4 Feb 2005, at 14:15, Karl Dubost wrote:
> Le 04 févr. 2005, à 07:57, Henry Story a écrit :
>> country  - (blank_predicate1) --> "Canada"
>> country  - (blank_predicate1) --> "Paris"
>
> You meant
> country  - (blank_predicate1) --> "Canada"
> country  - (blank_predicate1) --> "France"

Yes, that is what I meant. (Typed a little too fast
while someone was speaking to me)

> which is not inconsistent :)

Ok. But it is very clearly not what the original author
of the xml intended. Since
  - if the blank_predicates for both statements are the same then
  you would be saying that there is a country that is related in
  the same way to the string "Canada" and "France".
  - And if the blank_predicates for both statements are different
  then you would  be saying that there is a country that is related
  in some unknown way to the strings "France" and in some other unknown
  way to the string "Canada". Which would not be saying very much, since
  for any two things there is some relation that relates them.


>> [1] also available at
>>     https://bloged.dev.java.net/servlets/ReadMsg?list=users&msgNo=441
>
> Yes I have seen it and it's why I thought about the silly thing above 
> ;)

Josh Sled also pointed out a couple of very interesting links on the 
topic:

  <http://www-db.stanford.edu/~melnik/rdf/syntax.html>
  <http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Syntax>

> -- 
> Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
> W3C Conformance Manager
> *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
>
Received on Friday, 4 February 2005 13:51:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:13 GMT