Re: RDF Scoping Mechanism

On 2 Jul 2010, at 20:06, Pat Hayes wrote:

> 
> On Jul 2, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Nathan wrote:
> 
>> Pat Hayes wrote:
>>> It wouldn't take very much to make into full first-order logic: all it needs is a scoping mechanism (think graph literals in N3 or named graphs, or my 'surfaces' idea from the Blogic talk) and negation. Mind you, that scoping mechanism would drive a truck through triple-store-based implementations, I suspect. Back to tree structures and Sexpressions, no doubt :-)
>> 
>> Obvious question, regardless of implementations, is there any chance of getting that scoping mechanism in to RDF through W3C to rec?
>> 
>> Any rough ideas how long that process may take? (I'm assuming the RDF Semantics are bug-less and this would just be an addition).
> 
> Given the amount of Sturm and Drang that something as trivial as allowing literals in subject position has generated, I would think the answer is, likely not in my lifetime.

I think the arguments today have in fact shown that it is a lot easier and more useful
than people thought, so I think it could be done a lot sooner.

The issue of literals in subjects has more to do with some misunderstandings I think of
how complex and odd it is. I'd say let this conversation settle a bit. It really seems that
a lot of people have implemented it already.

Henry


> Pat
> 
>> 
>> My logic here is that if other serializations or even something N3-like were to go through standardization, then work would probably have to start on getting said scoping mech in to RDF sooner rather than later.
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Nathan
>> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
> 40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
> Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
> FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Received on Friday, 2 July 2010 18:14:52 UTC