W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > June 2020

Re: defining the semantics of lists

From: Patrick J Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 03:14:04 -0500
Message-ID: <CF35823D-59F8-45C5-AE62-8D7F627735E8@ihmc.us>
CC: Jiří Procházka <ojirio@gmail.com>, <semantic-web@w3.org>
To: thomas lörtsch <tl@rat.io>


> On Jun 10, 2020, at 5:02 PM, thomas lörtsch <tl@rat.io> wrote:
> 
...
> The situation with lists is a classic SNAFU. But lists are the easiest part. Identifcation is broken and no one even cares anymore. "Just use AI to disambiguate" I hear. Reification is a mess (and RDF* in its current state might make it better, or worse) and Named Graphs have no semantics, so there is no sound meta modelling in RDF.

Whoa. Named graphs have a really crisp, IMO actually rather beautiful, semantics which makes the ideas of committment and publication semantically exact, using the fundamental idea of a performative. Read the paper that introduced the terminology for details:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3199260

especially section 8.

Unfortunately, this semantics (and indeed the very idea of named graphs) was never warranted by the W3C, so remains only a suggestion. It is still a damn good suggestion, however. 

Pat


Received on Friday, 12 June 2020 08:14:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:42:10 UTC