W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > December 2004

Re: [OEP] n-ary relations and topic maps

From: Fabien Gandon <Fabien.Gandon@sophia.inria.fr>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 17:15:59 +0100
Message-ID: <41B485BF.8000905@sophia.inria.fr>
To: public-swbp-wg@w3.org

Christopher Welty a écrit :
> The general idea, that the limitation to binary properties in rdf 
> requires a workaround that is not required in other languages and 
> formats, does not need, IMHO, special treatment in a document that deals 
> with RDF.  There are a lot of representation formats that naturally 
> handle n-ary relations, probably the most important commercially is ER 
> diagrams, probably the oldest is good old FOL.
> So I don't think there is a need for an appendix in the n-ary relations 
> note for topic maps,  because that opens the door to arbitrarily 
> extending the note for every other format.  If there is a need to 
> describe the relationship between the workaround in the n-ary note and 
> topic maps, then I think it should be in a note about topic maps and 
> there relationship to RDF.

Just to concur with Christopher, my group is using a mapping with 
Conceptual Graphs to reason on RDF graphs. In CGs we have n-ary 
relations and the mapping is essentially ignoring that feature.
However I don't think n-ary relations in CGs should be mentioned since 
the note is focusing on design patterns in RDF/S and OWL.

Fabien.
-- 
"The plan is nothing, the planning is everything."
                         -- Sir Winston Churchill.
  ____________
|__ _ |_  http://www-sop.inria.fr/acacia/personnel/Fabien.Gandon/
|  (_||_) INRIA Sophia Antipolis - ph# (33)(0)4 92 38 77 88
Received on Monday, 6 December 2004 16:18:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:31:03 UTC