> > > a triple connecting a parent with a child, in a >subject-predicate-object format of person-parentOf-child, leaves >much unsaid -- a parent may > > > > have several children. If predicates serve as functions, then >this "function" might not have a well-defined value precisely >because the value > > > > could be any of a number of children. Of course one could make >the object a list, but that too has drawbacks. Logic long ago >handled > > > > > these matters by distinguishing between relations and >functions. But because relations can be multi-placed and do not >always fall neatly > > > > > into the subject-predicate-object framework, they are anathema >to many, to the detriment of the representational tools. > > > > To be fair to RDF, I think itis based on the relational intepretation. > >A quick glance at the RDF spec shows you are probably right. Point >taken. But then I wonder how one could distinguish a relation from a >well-defined function in RDF ... You can't in RDF, as far as I can tell, since it has no notion of equality. You can in DAML, with some awkwardness, by defining it as a property (= binary relation) with a uniqueness condition. 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/~phayesReceived on Tuesday, 12 June 2001 11:15:02 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:34:46 GMT