Re: F2F Decision: Multiple Resources - closing Set?

Hi Antoine,

To be concrete:

_:x a oa:Annotation ;
  oa:hasBody <body1> ;
  oa:hasBody <body2> ;
  oa:hasTarget <target1> ;
  oa:hasTarget <target2> .

is the conflation of 4 statements:
  body1 is about target1
  body1 is about target2
  body2 is about target1
  body2 is about target2

Each of those could be a separate annotation, and taking away one body or
target does not invalidate the other statements.


Compare to a Set or Composite:

_:x a oa:Annotation ;
  oa:hasBody <BodyComposite> ;
  oa:hasTarget <TargetComposite> ;

<BodyComposite> a oa:Set ;
  oa:item <body1> ;
  oa:item <body2> .

<TargetComposite> a oa:Set ;
  oa:item <target1> ;
  oa:item <target2> .

This is being explicit that the set of two resources body1 and body2 are
about the set of two resources target1 and target2. So the statement here
is more like:
    (body1, body2) is about (target1, target2)
Which can't be expressed as multiple annotations, and taking away a
resource does invalidate the statement.

Hope that helps :)

Rob

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote:

> Thank you both for the answers, really useful to get heads around the Set
> notion. But isn't there a contradiction between what Jacob said on multiple
> bodies/targets [1]:
> [
>
> the annotation node is putting them into a simple OR relationship to one
> another, e.g., < Body1> OR <Body2> annotates <Target1> OR <Target2>
> ]
> and what is said in the resolution [2]
> [
>
> Multiple occurrences of the same predicate are to be treated as
> "Individuals".
> This means that each body annotates each target completely independently
> of any other body or target.
> ]
> ?
>
>
>