Re: predicates as verbs

Reto and Jackub

 I'm wondering what the difference between

> properties and verbs are and about the advantages of the latter
> (unfortunately I cannot read that page via the link to google-doc).
>


The google book I refer to is the following, page 195-6
Entity-relationship approach, ER '93: 12th International Conference on the
Entity-Relationship Approach, Arlington, Texas, USA, December 15-17, 1993 :
proceedings
[image: Front Cover]<http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=1ftCwG4K-HEC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0>
Ramez Elmasri<http://www.google.co.uk/search?tbs=bks:1&tbo=p&q=+inauthor:%22Ramez+Elmasri%22>
, Vram Kouramajian<http://www.google.co.uk/search?tbs=bks:1&tbo=p&q=+inauthor:%22Vram+Kouramajian%22>
, Bernhard Thalheim<http://www.google.co.uk/search?tbs=bks:1&tbo=p&q=+inauthor:%22Bernhard+Thalheim%22>
<http://books.google.co.uk/books?sitesec=reviews&id=1ftCwG4K-HEC> 0
Reviews<http://books.google.co.uk/books?sitesec=reviews&id=1ftCwG4K-HEC>
Springer, 1994 -
Computers<http://www.google.co.uk/search?tbs=bks:1&tbo=p&q=+subject:%22Computers%22&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0>
-
530 pages
This monograph is devoted to computational morphology, particularly to the
construction of a two-dimensional or a three-dimensional closed object
boundary through a set of points in arbitrary position. By applying
techniques from computational geometry and CAGD, new results are developed
in four stages of the construction process: (a) the gamma-neighborhood graph
for describing the structure of a set of points; (b) an algorithm for
constructing a polygonal or polyhedral boundary (based on (a)); (c) the
flintstone scheme as a hierarchy for polygonal and polyhedral approximation
and localization; (d) and a Bezier-triangle based scheme for the
construction of a smooth piecewise cubic boundary.



Jackub


It has nothing to do with the specification of RDF as a

formal knowledge representation famework.


I am saying thats one of the reaons that make RDF a problem from a modelling
viewpoint for me
(together with possibly others)

*one last thing:*  most of the large RDF datasets that work (that I have
come across) are when the data has been taken
straight out a relational database  which has been modelled
with that rule in mind, else its 'awkward' (is that the going word for this
particular 'mess')



PDM





>
> Cheers,
> reto
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 5:13 PM, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I am not following close enough the discussion on subjects as literals ,
> and
> > whtere they contribute
> > to the awkwardness of RDF
> > One thing I remember finding it disorienting though, is that there is no
> > rule that a predicate must be a verb
> > (when I was looking at triple as if it were a subject- predicate- object
> > model )
> > In standard modelling practices  (E/R modeling) the relations tend to be
> > verbs
> >
> > CF PAGE 196
> >
> http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=1ftCwG4K-HEC&lpg=PA196&ots=FBX42Ms9Ys&dq=ENTITY%20RELATIONSHIP%20MODEL%20SENTENCE%20VERB%20RULE&pg=PA196#v=onepage&q&f=false
> > I did bring this up on another list, and the engineers thought it would
> be
> > good practice to
> > restrict predicates to verbs for obvious reasons (obvious to anyone who
> does
> > data models)
> > Not sure how that would play if RDF is shown as  EAV (entity attribute
> > value) rather thant SPO (subject predicate object)
> > Just thought I d mention this, in case someone wants to fix RDF thats the
> > first crack I spottend a while back
> > cheers
> > PDM
>