- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 07:26:55 -0400
- To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- CC: public-rdf-comments@w3.org
- Message-ID: <51A5E5FF.5080405@openlinksw.com>
On 5/29/13 1:29 AM, Henry Story wrote: > On 28 May 2013, at 21:41, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > >> On 5/20/13 11:39 AM, Henry Story wrote: >>> In Turtle there is no way of specifying a graph (other than through reificiation which >>> is understood to be broken). >> Why is reification assumed to be broken? I think the perception is that its cumbersome due to data bloat. Like blank nodes, this is a feature of RDF that's often misunderstood and then in the process maligned. >> >> Reification is the powerful mechanism for granular descriptions of triples (statements) without exiting existing RDF semantics. > It does not do quotation the way we need it. > > I want to express the following: > > Laura Lane believes that Superman is a Hero . > Superman is Clark Kent . > > With the suggested notation . > > lane:Laura believes """@prefix ... > super:man a Hero . > """^^lang:Turtle . > super:man owl:sameAs kent:Clark . > > With reification > > lane:Laura believes _:b . > _:b rdf:subject super:man ; > rdf:relation rdf:type ; > rdf:object Hero . > super:man owl:sameAs kent:Clark . > > Now since owl:sameAs allows substitution of identicals salva veritate, > it follows from the reification example but not from the quotation example > that Laura Lane believes that Clark Kent is a Hero. > > You can argue that is not broken because it is not the same as quotation > and it just does something else, and that would be fine. Yes. > > But we need the quotation mechanism, for many use case. It is not bringing any new > semantics into RDF in any case: it's just asking for a notation to > express what you can already express. We'd just like a standard notation > for something as important as this. defining lang:Turtle as a datatype, > with a well known w3c url. I am not opposed to the above, I was just saying that reification isn't broken i.e., it does have utility re., statement description :-) Kingsley > > > >> -- >> >> Regards, >> >> Kingsley Idehen >> Founder & CEO >> OpenLink Software >> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com >> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen >> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen >> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about >> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen >> >> >> >> >> > Social Web Architect > http://bblfish.net/ > > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Wednesday, 29 May 2013 11:27:21 UTC