- From: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
- Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 11:31:19 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
[me]
>I made such a proposal
>(http://cs-www.cs.yale.edu/homes/dvm/daml/proposal.html),
>and am now rethinking it. The most urgent change is to get rid of the
>triples idea; then most of the pressure for reification will vanish.
[jim hendler]
Let's be clear that Drew doesn't speak for all us ontologists when he
recommends getting rid of the triples - some of us (me included)
think that it is very useful to be based on RDF and triples rather
than inventing something new just for the sake of doing so...
In my experience, no one ever speaks for all ontologists; in fact, the
most I ever hope for is to speak for *one* ontologist, and I rarely
achieve that.
For me, "get rid of triples" has become shorthand for "get rid of the
assumption that asserting a structure of triples asserts every triple
in the structure." I have no objection to binary predicates; I could
even live with all predicates being binary if it would allow me to
speak for lots of ontologists. :)
-- Drew McDermott
Received on Thursday, 17 May 2001 11:31:21 UTC