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

Re: statements about a graph (Named Graphs, reification)

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 04:58:04 -0400
Message-Id: <25B3EBFD-9BCA-48D1-A828-4F7386642236@gmail.com>
Cc: K-fe bom <u9x3n_15so@hotmail.com>, semantic-web@w3.org
To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>

As a minor point, I don't think that the reification semantics are  
undefined. Rather they are well defined, but extremely weak. However,  
the end result, not useful for interoperability, is, I think, the  
same. As for public use of reification, the current OWL 1.1 proposal  
uses it in the RDF translation for axiom annotations. http:// 


On Sep 4, 2007, at 3:53 AM, Richard Cyganiak wrote:

> There isn't really any hope of getting interoperability with  
> reification, no matter what way you use it, because its semantics  
> are undefined and different people tried to use it quite  
> differently. You'll have trouble finding any published RDF that  
> uses reification, though some applications use it to good effect  
> internally.
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2007 08:58:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:02 UTC