Re: Why Literals should be unique and why this is a serious issue

Andreas Andreakis wrote:
> The question is how can we prevent same-concept dublication ?

Excuse me for being blunt, but I really don't see why you would want or 
need this in RDF.

If you really want to prevent duplication, you have to use OWL Full, as 
someone already explained. I don't see why or how you would prevent this 
in RDF.

IMO RDF was designed to be a loosely formatted way of describing 
resources. There is no limit to what you can describe or how. This also 
means that you are almost completely agnostic of what is being 
described. And this means that there is no way to really prevent a 100% 
fault-proof method of preventing concept duplication, unless you are 
really meticulously defining what you are talking about, in which case 
RDF is not for you, but OWL might be something more akin to what you want.

And about rdf:id, it has been posted on this list before, but it really 
doesn't mean much to declare something rdf:id. If you use it and convert 
it to triplets, then the fact that it should be a unique id is lost.
It only gets in your way if you want to extract things from the XML/RDF 
notation, because you have to account for both rdf:id and rdf:about.


Received on Saturday, 19 November 2005 13:01:57 UTC