Re: Comments on "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs"

On Fri, 2011-03-18 at 18:55 +0000, Nathan wrote:
> Kjetil Kjernsmo wrote:
[ . . . ]
> > Can something be both a foaf:PersonalProfileDocument and 
> > an RDF Graph? (my intuition says no).
> 
> Nope.

Careful.  That's only true in a graph in which those classes have been
declared disjoint.  

This particular example is all the more confusing because Kjetil has
used RDF Graphs as one of the classes in the example.  So to avoid that
confusion, let me rephrase the question substituting "red lightbulbs"
for "RDF Graphs":

>> Can something be both a foaf:PersonalProfileDocument and 
> > a red lightbulb? (my intuition says no).

In a given graph g, a URI u can perfectly well (ambiguously) identify
something that is both a foaf:PersonalProfileDocument and a red
lightbulb, provided that g has no disjointness or other such predicates
that would prevent it from being so.

You need to know what graph you are asking about, and what assertions it
contains, to answer the question.


-- 
David Booth, Ph.D.
http://dbooth.org/

Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect those of his employer.

Received on Friday, 18 March 2011 19:58:58 UTC