W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > April 2001

Re: Reification

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 13:49:07 -0500
Message-Id: <v0421010db6f3bfbcdd87@[205.160.76.201]>
To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
> > In my opinion, this is an extremely messy way to approach what is
> > basically a simple problem.  At any point in this downward spiral we
> > can jump ship and switch to a non-RDF language.  Indeed, the only
> > reason to stick with an RDF language inside the quotes is to fool
> > ourselves into thinking we haven't left RDF; it's RDF outside the
> > quotes and RDF inside.  But the stuff inside the quotes requires all
> > sorts of machinery that we didn't need outside them, so we really are
> > fooling ourselves.
>
>Pop-up an RDF node as/into an RDF graph *in place* (somewhat by-value).
>Its content is not asserted, only quoted in a *non-opaque* way (as RDF).

That is a contradiction. What do you mean by 'non-opaque' quoting?

>We certainly can feed resolution-based logic/proof engines that way.

Not while retaining consistency you can't. In a sense, of course, you 
can input any string of characters you like into any engine you like, 
and *something* will happen. Not a very useful sense, though.

Pat Hayes

---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
phayes@ai.uwf.edu 
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Friday, 6 April 2001 14:47:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:38 GMT