Re: complete graphs

On 30/09/11 13:59, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
> On 9/30/2011 8:44 AM, Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider wrote:
>> From: Sandro Hawke<>
>> Subject: Re: complete graphs
>> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 07:31:26 -0500
>> [...]
>>> The restriction on the fourth column is that the fourth column is the
>>> web address of a place (a g-box) currently serving that triple.
>>> (That's the architecture I'm arguing for in this morning's post to
>>> public-rdf-prov [1].)
>> You are going to build this into the formal meaning of RDF?
>> That's a non-starter for me.
> If I understand it correctly, I think it's a non-starter for me as well.
> This would prohibit non-HTTP URIs from being used to as the 4th element
> in a quad (i.e. as the identifier of a named graph)?
> Lee

I understood Sandro's remark coming out of the discussion about 
provenance on the web and so I took generalising to any URI scheme for 
other situations as read.


>>> The issue about completeness is that if I want to say, as in [1], that I
>>> agree or disagree with a statement (or otherwise build on it), it's
>>> important the readers see the whole statement (or know that they are
>>> seeing only a partial statement). It's even more important for me to
>>> know if I'm seeing the whole statement before I say if I agree.
>> Please, let's try to be more precise. In particular, there is
>> rdf:Statement, so "statement" is something that has to be carefully
>> used.
>>> -- Sandro
>>> [1]
>> peter

Received on Friday, 30 September 2011 14:04:50 UTC