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

RE: Syntax vs Semantics vs XML Schema vs RDF Schema vs QNames vs URIs (was RE: Using urn:publicid: for namespaces)

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 11:36:40 +0300
Message-ID: <2BF0AD29BC31FE46B78877321144043114B533@trebe003.NOE.Nokia.com>
To: tpassin@home.com, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Indeed, if you think of a set of triples as being rows in a relational
> database table, then ask what would be the primary key of 
> that table?  The
> only sensible answer is that the primary key must be the 
> combination of the
> subject and predicate.  The "semantics" could also be 
> considered to be a
> kind of "business rule", to use an expression from a different domain.
> Taking this relational database viewpoint, each node must 
> necessarily have a
> value (or label), but it may be that a particular 
> implementation could hide
> the label, or exclude it from serialization.

Exactly. This is what I was trying to get at with my examples that
autogenerated identities of "anonymous" nodes based on their
"context" made up of the subject and predicate. Having the same
consistent identity makes comparison of values and enforcement
of constraints much more straight forward.

I think you explained it better, though, than I did.

Cheers,

Patrick

--
Patrick Stickler                      Phone:  +358 3 356 0209
Senior Research Scientist             Mobile: +358 50 483 9453
Software Technology Laboratory        Fax:    +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center                 Video:  +358 3 356 0209 / 4227
Visiokatu 1, 33720 Tampere, Finland   Email:  patrick.stickler@nokia.com
 
Received on Monday, 20 August 2001 04:36:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:40 GMT