Re: Provenance as a first-class citizen

From: ben syverson <>
Subject: Re: Provenance as a first-class citizen 
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 16:04:43 -0600

> On Mar 17, 2006, at 2:56 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> > For making statements about statements -- which you're talking  
> > about --
> > you need something more complex, like quads or reification, but that's
> > relatively rare (even if it's very interesting).
> Yes, and that's precisely the problem. It shouldn't be rare; *all*  
> statements should be either implicitly or explicitly qualified via  
> quads/reification.
> The web is mess of a trillion viewpoints -- the current SW model is  
> equivalent to getting an RSS feed of articles from all over the web,  
> with no reference to the original sources. A human can look at an  
> article titled "Aliens Impregnate Brad Pitt" and know to ignore it  
> when determining facts about Brad Pitt, but the Semantic Web has no  
> such capability.
> It doesn't matter that you *can* reify statements within RDF. My wish  
> is that you wouldn't be able to *avoid* making reified statements.

I sense an infinite regress problem here.

> - ben syverson


Received on Friday, 17 March 2006 22:15:57 UTC