W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-hydra@w3.org > June 2014

Re: How to avoid that collections "break" relationships (ISSUE-41)

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 11:22:28 -0400
Message-ID: <53908B34.6070101@openlinksw.com>
To: public-hydra@w3.org
On 6/5/14 9:35 AM, Ruben Verborgh wrote:
>> >As Gregg noted in a different mail [1] (I'm on a plane, so perhaps he
>> >already responded himself in the meantime) using rdf:subject etc. would mean
>> >that the whole thing is an rdf:Statement:
> Which does not need to be a bad thing.
>> >  I don't think we want to invoke Reification
> But we are: if we say that
> "this is the document consisting of triples with that subject and predicate",
> we are doing reification. No need to hide that.


I don't know how reification became a conflation of "bad thing" and "bad 

If denoting useful things with HTTP URIs is RDF based Linked Data 101, 
what's wrong with denoting an rdf:Statement ?

Reification is actually very useful, and it does actually help 
developers and end-user comprehend RDF.

These matters are all artificially confusing because of that ghastly RDF 
notation called RDF/XML.



Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen

Received on Thursday, 5 June 2014 15:22:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 15:53:59 UTC