Re: blank predicates

<> is a relative IRI with an empty string relative to some base IRI - so Linked Data clients will typically replace it with the file:// or http(s):// URL of the document they read from.

So don't use that, unless you want location-dependent predicates :)


Cheers,

Claus


On 28.03.20 11:03, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 28 Mar 2020 at 10:53, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org <mailto: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 <mailto: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?
>
-- 
Dipl. Inf. Claus Stadler
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
Research Group: http://aksw.org/
Workpage & WebID: http://aksw.org/ClausStadler
Phone: +49 341 97-32260