W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > May 2011

Re: GoodRelations Light

From: glenn mcdonald <glenn@furia.com>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 14:02:26 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTinNMgvcvjb=462FZt3-OnEQbAHAGw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael F Uschold <uschold@gmail.com>, "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>
>
> things that we haven't given a name. For example when my wife was
> pregnant, there was a growing embryo that we didn't name for a while.
> A bnode might be used to represent that growing to-be child.
>

This, like many examples people give of things you'd use a blank node for,
misses the point. The embryo may not have a name yet, but it has a gender
and a conception date and a size and a nucal transparency, is the subject of
ultrasound imaging, etc. It isn't a logical abstraction, it's a specific
entity. It should have a URI.

This might sound tangential, but I contend that you'll have a much easier
time talking about blank nodes clearly if you stick to using them, even in
examples, only in cases where they're actually required: to state an
existential quantification, like "somebody must have seen the crash", not
just to talk about a specific individual for whom we're just missing some
information.

(But then, I also contend that this whole concept should be moved out of RDF
into OWL.)
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2011 18:03:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:27 UTC