W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > March 2020

Re: blank predicates

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2020 11:03:51 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKaEYhLB05Fa_4u=ab7OaVf-CMOgx0WnzZAnzc3N7VQEUakQKw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Cc: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
On Sat, 28 Mar 2020 at 10:53, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:

>
> there are an infinite number of boring relationships that hold between any
> arbitrary pair of objects; your best bet might be to name one for your
> application rather than attempt to use generalized (predicateless) rdf
>

So maybe simply <> ?

#Alice <> #Bob .


>
> Dan
>
> On Sat, 28 Mar 2020 at 08:57, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I am working on a information mapping system (aka mind maps)
>>
>> And I want to have two nodes related to each other
>>
>> #Alice R #Bob
>>
>> In the general sense, the type of relationship (predicate) R is not
>> really known at the time of creation.  My software currently does not allow
>> the labeling of edges is the reason (but hopefully in future it will)
>>
>> I need a way to relate Alice to Bob but I dont have a URI for a predicate.
>>
>> Is there something that can operate as a "blank predicate"?
>>
>> Or some existing relations that simply says that two entities or linked /
>> related, without yet knowing how they are related?
>>
>
Received on Saturday, 28 March 2020 10:04:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 28 March 2020 10:04:19 UTC