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

RE: properties as nodes etc.

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 11:10:47 -0500
Message-Id: <p05111b0ab93e45bbbcbe@[]>
To: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@virgilio.it>
Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org

>Thanks Jonathan.
>>In RDF an edge corresponds not to the property or predicate URI but rather
>>to the triple itself. Many edges may share the same predicate, so the
>>predicate URI does not 'point' to or identify the edge itself.
>No wonder I was getting confused re. classes and instances. The primer
>doesn't help :
>(2.3) "In this notation, a statement is represented by a node for the
>subject, a node for the object, and a labeled arc between them for the
>predicate. ... The examples also illustrate that RDF uses URIs as predicates
>in RDF statements. "
>Though the MT is clearer :
>(0.2) "Finally, every arc in an RDF graph is labelled with a uriref. The
>same uriref may label several arcs and also be a node in the graph"
>So what this boils down to then (correct me if I'm wrong), to make
>assertions about a specific instance of a predicate, it's necessary to first
>reify the particular statement that contains it (which I think Seth was

NO, that doesn't work. That makes an assertion about the piece of 
syntax, not about the instance of the property. Forget about 
reification; reification in RDF was just a mistake. The short answer 
is that there isnt any way to refer to a property instance in RDF. 
The more useful answer is that you can always introduce a subproperty 
with only one instance, and refer that instead.

>But then I don't see how information added by this means can be
>accessed without the reification, and hence what use it can be (how does an
>implementation know when to reify?).

Good question.

>Any clarification on this would be appreciated.
>>>  What I've got at the moment is something like this :
>>>     Identifiable (Temporal, Described)
>>>         |
>>>        Item
>>>     /   |   \
>>>  Vertex Edge (Adjunct)
>>>  Identifiable more or less corresponds to URI
>>This is the problem, an "edge" is not a URI as opposed to vertices
>>which are
>  >named by URIs.

WHY is this perceived as a problem? What use is there in referring to edges?

Pat Hayes
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
Received on Tuesday, 25 June 2002 12:10:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:38:24 UTC