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

Re: Paradoxes are bugs on the SW was: Re: questions on assertion

From: David Allsopp <d.allsopp@signal.qinetiq.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 09:15:37 +0100
Message-ID: <3D410529.7DE33F97@signal.qinetiq.com>
CC: www-rdf-logic@w3.org



"Thomas B. Passin" wrote:

> Remember, a reified statement is not considered asserted in RDF.  That is,
> the reification is asserted but not the truth of the triple described by the
> rdf:Statement.  So you can in fact make statements about other statements
> without having RDF insist on their being asserted.  Of course, you only want
> to do that to selected statements, not every one.  It seems ridiculous to
> have to think about treating an entire store of triples that way, pending,
> perhaps, a resolution of their veracity.

I don't think its ridiculous at all.  There are lots of situations where
one would need to be able to store the reliability, or the origin, or
timestamp of all your data, in order to later filter out the subset that
you want. Otherwise, when an originally trusted source turns out to be
unreliable, how will you know which individual statements you no longer
trust?

Of course doing this with actual quad reification doesn't seem a very
attractive solution...

Regards,

David.

-- 
/d{def}def/u{dup}d[0 -185 u 0 300 u]concat/q 5e-3 d/m{mul}d/z{A u m B u
m}d/r{rlineto}d/X -2 q 1{d/Y -2 q 2{d/A 0 d/B 0 d 64 -1 1{/f exch d/B
A/A z sub X add d B 2 m m Y add d z add 4 gt{exit}if/f 64 d}for f 64 div
setgray X Y moveto 0 q neg u 0 0 q u 0 r r r r fill/Y}for/X}for showpage
Received on Friday, 26 July 2002 04:17:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:42 GMT