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

Re: Why? Re: rdf as a base for other languages

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 15:23:20 -0400
To: sandro@w3.org
Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Message-Id: <20010602152320B.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Why? Re: rdf as a base for other languages 
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 12:49:14 -0400

> > I really really don't mean to _assert_ that the diagnosis is one in that
> > particular list.
> > 
> > What I do wish to assert is the <if> expression. The problem with RDF as it
> > is currently defined (statement == triple == fact) is that I cannot assert
> > an expression created of multiple statements (i.e. a subgraph) apparently
> > without asserting each of the subgraphs within the subgraph.
> (repeating Dan Connolly yesterday...)
> This seems to be a common myth.  Where in the current definition of
> RDF does it say that you cannot describe (mention) a triple without
> asserting (using) it?
> (I wont be shocked if it does say it somewhere -- I'm not fond of the
> current REC -- but I would love a pointer if you happen to know where
> it says this.)
>     -- sandro

Let me turn this around.  Where in the spec does it say that there is any
way of mentioning a triple except by asserting it?  (No, I don't count
reification here.)

Received on Saturday, 2 June 2001 15:24:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 11:10:35 UTC