- From: Fabio Vitali <fabio.vitali@unibo.it>
- Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 09:07:40 +0000
- To: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
- CC: thomas lörtsch <tl@rat.io>, "public-rdf-star@w3.org" <public-rdf-star@w3.org>
>> "Being married" is a state, and can only be true or false, but not multiple. > > I'm not entirely sure what you meant by "not multiple," but want to be > sure that further work by all parties is not governed by a restriction > of some jurisdictions; that is, one may indeed be married with multiple > spouses, depending on one's beliefs and the laws of one's jurisdiction > of residence. Indeed! Indeed! Both bigamy (the crime) as well as polygamy (the cultural institution) are just more nails in the coffin of marriage as a "simple binary relationship". Marriage is not an isolated case. There should be a reasonable and sanctioned way to switch between binary and n-ary relationships without loosing important semantics in the transition. This is why we should consider adding non-statedness to graphs. Fabio P.S.: "not multiple" in my broken English meant simply that multiple identical triples should not be used to represent multiple temporally separated marriages. -- > > To be a bit more explicit, the Taylor+Burton scenario covers serial > monogamous marriage. There are places in the world where husbands, > wives, both, and/or other (allowing for non-polar gender), may be > multiple within a single marriage. > > The possible states of "being married" remain only true or false, > but the participants therein are not limited to a total of two. > > Assumptions and projections of gender (that it is purely polar, > rather than the more and more commonly accepted and understood > gradient range, with many more values than "male" or "female") are > similarly problematic, even though for decades if not centuries, > the generally accepted "truth" has been that a child may only have > two parents, one of each of only two genders. Today, there are > many more possibilities that we should be able to handle, starting > but far from finishing with the results of divorce and remarriage. > > Be seeing you, > > Ted > > > -- > A: Yes. http://www.idallen.com/topposting.html > | Q: Are you sure? > | | A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. > | | | Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? > > Ted Thibodeau, Jr. // voice +1-781-273-0900 x32 > Senior Support & Evangelism // mailto:tthibodeau@openlinksw.com > // http://twitter.com/TallTed > OpenLink Software, Inc. // http://www.openlinksw.com/ > 20 Burlington Mall Road, Suite 322, Burlington MA 01803 > Weblog -- http://www.openlinksw.com/blogs/ > Community -- https://community.openlinksw.com/ > LinkedIn -- http://www.linkedin.com/company/openlink-software/ > Twitter -- http://twitter.com/OpenLink > Facebook -- http://www.facebook.com/OpenLinkSoftware > Universal Data Access, Integration, and Management Technology Providers > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 7 December 2021 09:07:59 UTC