- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>
- Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 21:39:20 +0100
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: Ron Daniel <rdaniel@interwoven.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 05:16 PM 7/5/01 +0100, Brian McBride wrote:
> > So note that the rdf:about attribute was used above. This was
> > to explicitly indicate that the in-line description was NOT
> > the authoritative description of the GR resource. The PRISM
> > spec says that when you do create a document that IS the
> > authoritative definition of that resource, the rdf:ID
> > attribute must be used instead.
>
>A very interesting example. Seems like this gets into (shuts eyes,
>grimaces, holds breath) provenance and reification. Does a PRISM
>processor need to store the fact that a triple was generated
>from description element with an rdf:about attribute rather than
>an rdf:ID attribute. Would generating isDefinedIn be enough
>to capture the requisite information? Does generating an
>isDefinedIn contribute towards capturing the information?
I'm not convinced that this particular "provenance" issue should be bound
so deeply in the core of RDF, but *if* this distinction is felt to be
needed then the handling suggested seems about right to me.
#g
------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne Baltimore Technologies
Strategic Research Content Security Group
<Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com> <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<http://www.baltimore.com>
------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Thursday, 5 July 2001 16:46:22 UTC