W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > February 2007

Re: An RDF Reification Syntax Idea

From: Stian Soiland <ssoiland@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 08:47:59 +0000
Message-Id: <B3070A9E-A3F0-4C51-89E9-444761154147@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
To: Adam <adamsobieski@hotmail.com>


On 3 Feb 2007, at 19:42, Adam wrote:

> In looking over some RDF triple store libraries, I noticed some  
> take a metadata-optional approach.  This notation may also take  
> that approach.  A pure graph representation (three columns) could  
> possibly discard the additional information in such a information- 
> bearing URI and view the element as a node.  However, there may be  
> possiblities for metadata (potentially requiring a primary key)  
> beyond sourcing a triple to an author, and other conceivably  
> discardable statements in graph merging.  So, this idea appears to  
> fall into the metadata might be useful category.

Although a bit verbose, can't you use something like in N3:

{ fish:book dc:title "Moby Dick" } a n3:falsehood .

.. and limit yourself to using triple in the {}? Of course this  
wouldn't capture where you actually got that tuple from, and wouldn't  
give you a nice URI scheme, but at least we would know which triple  
we are talking about.

-- 
Stian Soiland, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~ssoiland/
Received on Tuesday, 6 February 2007 08:48:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:41:02 UTC