Re: Why skolemization?

Pat Hayes wrote:
> On Mar 26, 2011, at 4:52 PM, Nathan wrote:
>> Pat Hayes wrote:
>>> On Mar 26, 2011, at 11:06 AM, Nathan wrote:
>>>> Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>>>> Skolemization.
>>>> Sorry, but can somebody clarify why we, or RDF, needs Skolemization? Is this to cover a data management problem particular to a certain way of storing RDF data?
>>> It means that RDF need not have blank nodes , which (it is suggested) makes it simpler and easier to process in many ways.
>> If RDF doesn't have blank nodes, then what is being skolemized? (pre no-blank-node-rdf?)
> I think we are going in circles here :-)  There is a lot of RDF-1 out there. It has blank nodes in it. If we were to publish a spec defining RDF-2 without blank nodes (or with deprecated blank nodes, etc.) then all that RDF-1 would have to be converted to RDF-2. Also, some folk might want to compose RDF-1 because they like it, and automagically convert it to RDF-2. Skolemization does that.
> That is my understanding of this conversation, at any rate. Others' mileage may vary.

Thanks Pat, just wanted it stated tersely to save any confusion about 
the context and what was trying to be achieved :)

ps: also my understanding, have a feeling some may be seeing it as (how 
do we remove existential quantification) or (how do we make blank node 
identifiers reliable/persistent for data management purposes)



Received on Saturday, 26 March 2011 23:03:47 UTC