- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 19:35:14 +0100
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 15 December 2011 14:08, Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com> wrote: > On 14/12/11 23:03, Sandro Hawke wrote: >> >> But I've given up on that resistance, and am >> finding the idea of >> >> something-with-an-RDF-Graph-as-its-State-as-far-as-Web-Clients-are-concerned >> is pretty simple, too. > > > and FROM NAMED uses that as the label. > > PREFIX log: <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#> > PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> > PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> > > SELECT * > FROM NAMED <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log.rdf> > { > GRAPH ?g > { > log:semantics rdfs:comment ?definition ; > rdfs:domain ?domain ; > rdfs:range ?range ; > rdfs:label ?label . > } > } > > > which to save you the trouble of executing that query, the N3 version says: > > log:semantics a rdf:Property; > rdfs:domain doc:Work; > rdfs:range log:Formula; > rdfs:label "semantics"; > rdfs:comment """The log:semantics of a document is the formula. > achieved by parsing representation of the document. > For a document in Notation3, log:semantics is the > log:parsedAsN3 of the log:contents of the document. > For a document in RDF/XML, it is parsed according to the > RDF/XML specification to yield an RDF formula > (a subclass of N3 log:Formula). > > [Aside: Philosophers will be distracted here into worrying about the meaning > of meaning. At least we didn't call this function "meaning"! > In as much as N3 is used as an interlingua for interoperability > for different systems, this for an N3 based system is the meaning > expressed by a document.] > > (Cwm knows how to go get a document and parse N3 and RDF/XML > it in order to evaluate this. > Other languages for web documents > may be defined whose N3 semantics are therefore > also calculable, and so they could be added in due course. > See for example GRDDL, RDFa, etc)""". The existence of log:semantics at least lets us try to pose a question: Does log:semantics act as an owl:FunctionalProperty? i.e. within a single graph, can we expect at most one true property value for it? People seem to talk as if it is functional, but I can't see that working out in practice. Dan
Received on Thursday, 15 December 2011 21:30:19 UTC