W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > February 2002

Re: Reification thing questions

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 08:08:53 -0800
Message-ID: <01c101c1ae5f$689361e0$657ba8c0@c1457248a.sttls1.wa.home.com>
To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: "RDF Logic" <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
From: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>

> >>> For example:
> >>>
> >>> foo:bar goo:dar poo:sar.
> >>>
> >>> [
> >>> rdf:type rdf:Statement;
> >>> rdf:subject foo:bar;
> >>> rdf:predicate goo:gar;
> >>> rdf:object: poo:sar;
> >>> ex:time "9:15PM"
> >>> email::mid  0$657ba8c0@c1457248a.sttls1.wa.home.com ;
> >>> ex:documentLocation  :SethsOutbox
> >>> ]
> >>>
> >>> The description above describes the triple as it existed momentarily
in
> > my
> >>> out box.  It does not describe the copy of that same triple as it
exists
> > in
> >>> your inbox.
> >>
> >> Uhhh... now I'm confused as to which "thing" we are talking about.
> >> I thought the "thing" was the bNode with rdf:type rdf:Statement.
> >> You seem to now be equating "thing" with the triple. Or have I
> >> just gotten gonzo confused ;-)
> >>
> >> If the "thing" is the reification, and if the reification is copied,
> >> then of course the copy describes the original statement as accurately
> >> and completely as the original reification. Why wouldn't it?
> >
> > I agree.  Since there is both a triple in the document as well as a
> > description of that triple in the same document, when the document is
> > copied, the description of the triple still refers to the original
triple.
> > But it does not refer to the triple in the document in your email in
box.
> > This is a very carefully contrived case :)
>
> Hmmm... I'm gonna sleep on that one and let my subconscious
> take a wack at it ;-)

There is nothing very philosophically subtle here, the trick is in the
description "ex:documentLocation  :SethsOutbox".  You, of all people,  could
probably help me with the exact URI that would be correct for ":SethsOutbox"
and how the rdfs:range should be specified to make the example actually
work.

Also when I was composing the email I didn know the exact Message-ID or time
that it would appear in my out box ... please to correct the example above
with the following data which is now known:
Message-Id 014501c1ae04$00234c20$657ba8c0@c1457248a.sttls1.wa.home.com
date 4 Feb 2002 21:14:34 -0800

Seth Russell
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2002 11:12:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:41 GMT