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

Re: reification test case

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 06:31:13 -0800
Message-ID: <000f01c1afe4$182d22a0$657ba8c0@c1457248a.sttls1.wa.home.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
From: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

> > RDF is used to describe resources, right?   Bnodes describe resources.
The
> > use of the word 'single' is what we are arguing about.  Certainly Bnodes
do
> > not necessarily describe only a *single* object in the domain of our
> > discourse.  One Bnode can describe many objects at once. For example:
the
> > following RDF Bnode description, written in N3 with it's corresponding
> > schema (not included), certainly does not describe only one *single*
> > automobile.
> >
> >    [rdf:type :Automobile;
> >     :has :wheels, :motor; :
> >     :manufacturedBy :GM;
> >     :modelName "Oldsmobile"]
>
> No, no, no, a thousand times no!!!!

Ok, ok, ok .. I was wrong .. mea copa.   So how do we represent the class of
oldsmobiles?

    [rdf:type rdfs:Class;
     :has :wheels, :motor; :
     :manufacturedBy :GM;
     :modelName "Oldsmobile"]

But then can we say the following?

  [rdfs:subclass  rdf:Statement
   rdf:subject  :S1
   rdf:predicate :P1
   rdf:object :O1
   dc:author :Seth]

If not, why not?

Seth Russell
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2002 09:34:23 GMT

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