- From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 20:57:34 +0100
- To: "Jeff Thompson" <jeff@thefirst.org>
- Cc: <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A0EA6836@judith.fzi.de>
Jeff Thompson wrote: >In mapping OWL to RDF graphs, to make an annotation on a triple, the >triple >is reified into separate subject, predicate and object assertions >similar to reification in RDF. > >_:x rdf:type owl:Annotation >_:x owl:subject T(y) >_:x owl:predicate T(AP) >_:x owl:object T(av) > >But Tim Berners-Lee is still saying that reification in RDF is broken. >See this message from last year: >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2007Jan/0088.html So what about _:x foaf:mbox "john.doe@example.org" _:x foaf:knows ex:alice _:x foaf:interest ex:love _:x foaf:knows ex:bob in connection with ex:alice ex:love ex:bob ? >If reification in RDF is broken, and OWL adopts the same method for >quoting a triple so that it can be annotated, does OWL inherit >the same problems Tim has been talking about for all these years? > >- Jeff Whatever the current state of RDF Reification is (or whatever some people might believe it is), it doesn't have any consequences for the OWL 2 annotations you mention above, since there is no semantic connection between RDF Reification and OWL 2 annotations. Michael -- Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE) Tel : +49-721-9654-726 Fax : +49-721-9654-727 Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de Web : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555 FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959 Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova, Rudi Studer Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus
Received on Wednesday, 3 December 2008 19:58:16 UTC