- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 10:22:56 +0100
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- CC: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
pat hayes wrote: > Seems to me that > introducing contexts or quads or whatever are all much bigger changes > to the RDF model than introducing what amounts to a new category of > triple (or just changing the spec so that some of the old triples > have a different interpretation.) M&S discusses the concept of a 'model' or 'graph' aka context aka StatementSet - essentially being a set of statements. Unfortunately it doesn't make any mention of this concept in the section 5. Thus this concept does not have to be introduced to RDF, but it does need to be better defined. For my money a lump of RDF/XML or N3 represents a set of Statements and we can talk about whether a statement is a member of that set or not, something I find clearer than talking about whether a statement is 'asserted' or not. N3 introduces a syntax for embedding the respresention of such a set of statements (N3 calls them contexts) inside the representation of another, a feature RDF/XML current lacks. Brian
Received on Sunday, 17 June 2001 05:24:41 UTC