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

Re: Reification quoting in RDF/N3 was: A note comparing Conceptual Graphs and RDF/Semantic Web

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 22:55:15 -0000
Message-ID: <00cd01c081a1$b9a09300$0fd689d4@z5n9x1>
To: "Bill dehOra" <BdehOra@interx.com>
Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
> > @prefix : <#>
> > :bill :loves :jane
> Sure. Now are we giving them a URI before we serialize this stuff
> up and send it on its way,

Serialize and send on its way? "Bill (the URI)" would be described in the
file itself, or linked to a schema URI: in other words, something that
asserts that the uri <#bill> is a representation for a human... from the N3

     "Not everything has a URI, as you can talk about something
     by just using its properties. But using a URI allows other
     documents and systems to easily reuse your information."
     - http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/Primer

We just had these conversations about representing people by their
mailboxes on RDF IG... that's what I'm taking my cue from.

> or are we giving incoming string literals URIs?

We're tying properties to a URI, that's all. The URI itself isn't
important: it doesn't need to exist - we're just talking about it. When you
talk about it, you talk about something that has the same properties as
Bill, e.g. :bill = Bill. Then, other SW machines can process those
some"thing" with those same properties by effering to that URI. It wouldn't
matter if all of this was on Bill's home machine, but it's on the Web. The
Digital Signatrues idea runs parallel and crosses this. At some point we'll
need Bill to sign these properties if they are to believed I guess.

Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://infomesh.net/2001/01/n3terms/#> .
[ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] has :homepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
Received on Thursday, 18 January 2001 17:56:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 11:10:33 UTC