Re: A single reifier can reify more than one triple term

> On 25. Mar 2024, at 09:12, Franconi Enrico <franconi@inf.unibz.it> wrote:
> 
> I wish to insist on the meaningfulness of my example: 
> << :b1 | :enrico :born-in :rome >> :date 1962 .
> << :b1 | :enrico :born-on 1962 >> :location :rome .

You argue as if :b1 referred to the whole statement in which :b1 is used as a subject, but it doesn’t. :b1 only refers to the triple terms <<( :enrico :born-in :rome )>> and <<( :enrico :born-on 1962  )>>, not to the annotation(s). Those two triple terms have different meanings. 

I would agree with you if you argued that :b1 describes the event of    
   :enricos :birth
   :in :rome
   :on 1962
an event encoded in 2 triple terms.

Best,
Thomas



> Please read on to understand my argument.
> 
> Suppose there is a database in the registry office:
> 
> BIRTH-CERTIFICATE
> +-----+---------+----------+------+
> | ID  |  name   | location | date |
> +-----+---------+----------+------+
> | :b1 | :enrico | :rome    | 1962 |
> | :b2 | :mary   | :rome    | 1962 |
> | :b3 | :enrico | :rome    | 1980 |
> | :b4 | :mary   | :rome    | 1980 |
> | :b5 | :enrico | :milan   | 1962 |
> | :b6 | :mary   | :milan   | 1962 |
> | :b7 | :enrico | :milan   | 1980 |
> | :b8 | :mary   | :milan   | 1980 |
> +-----+---------+----------+------+
>   Primary Key: ID
>   Alternate Key: name, location, date
> 
> It is important to notice that no pair among the three attributes name, location, date is sufficient to identify a birth certificate.
> Two departments decide to expose this data as LOD, but in different ways.
> 
> Generated graph-1:
> 
> << :b1 | :enrico :born-in :rome >> :date 1962 .
> << :b2 | :mary :born-in :rome >> :date 1962 .
> << :b3 | :enrico :born-in :rome >> :date 1980 .
> etc 
> Observe that they had to choose a different name for the attribute within the context of the triple term: this is because the predicate :born-in in the triple term relates the name of a person with its birth location, as opposed the attribute :location which relates a birth certificate with the birth location of the name of a person at a certain date.
> 
> Similarly for the second department - they also changed the predicate :date to :born-on:
> 
> Generated graph-2:
> 
> << :b1 | :enrico :born-on 1962 >> :location :rome .
> << :b2 | :mary :born-on 1962 >> :location :rome .
> etc
> 
> If we merge the two LOD graphs (set union):
> 
> << :b1 | :enrico :born-in :rome >> :date 1962 .
> << :b1 | :enrico :born-on 1962 >> :location :rome .
> etc
> 
> which entails
> 
> << :b1 | :enrico :born-in :rome >> :location :rome .
> << :b1 | :enrico :born-on 1962 >> :date 1962 .
> etc
> 
> ➡️ Observe that even if it seems that there is redundant information, the predicates are different (:born-in vs :location, and :born-on vs :date). This is because they serve different purposes: one applies to the name of a person, the other applies to a certificate.
> 
> I hope this clarifies:
>     • the need to allow a reifier to reify two distinct triple terms;
>     • the possibility to express the same information in different ways.
> 
> cheers
> —e.
> 
>

Received on Monday, 25 March 2024 19:08:59 UTC