- From: Haijie.Peng <haijie.peng@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2010 13:45:59 +0800
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- CC: Yves Raimond <yves.raimond@gmail.com>, nathan@webr3.org, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
On 2010/7/1 22:35, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> Yves Raimond wrote:
>> Hello Kingsley!
>>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> IMHO an emphatic NO.
>>>
>>> RDF is about constructing structured descriptions where "Subjects" have
>>> Identifiers in the form of Name References (which may or many
>>> resolve to
>>> Structured Representations of Referents carried or borne by Descriptor
>>> Docs/Resources). An "Identifier" != Literal.
>>>
>>> If you are in a situation where you can't or don't want to mint an HTTP
>>> based Name, simply use a URN, it does the job.
>>
>> It does look like you're already using literal subjects in OpenLink
>> Virtuoso though:
>>
>> http://docs.openlinksw.com/virtuoso/rdfsparql.html
>>
>> SQL>SELECT *
>> FROM <people>
>> WHERE
>> {
>> ?s foaf:Name ?name . ?name bif:contains "'rich*'".
>> }
>>
>> Best,
>> y
>>
>
> Were is the Literal Subject in the query above?
>
> bif:contains is a function/magic predicate scoped to Literal Objects.
>
> <people> != "people".
Let's consider the following inequality:
people != people
if we imposed different interpretations on both sides，then we certainly
could conclude the first 'people' is non-equivalence to the second
'people' in semantic. Semantic of things is not reflected in the literal
meaning, but is reflected in interpreter's behavior and its impact on
the environment/world.
my two cents.
regards
Peng
>
> What am I missing?
>
Received on Saturday, 3 July 2010 05:46:39 UTC