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: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@comcast.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 08:32:52 -0400
To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Message-id: <000601c234a0$8f7b0110$fe193044@tbp1>

[David Allsopp]>
>
> "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...

That is what I meant, doing it __using standard RDF reification__ seems
pretty ugly...

Cheers,

Tom P
Received on Friday, 26 July 2002 08:34:11 GMT

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