- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:48:33 +0100
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 08:23 PM 7/16/01 +0100, Brian McBride wrote:
>I asked my colleagues if they had any use cases for anon resources
>that might help us with this issue. What follows is an (edited)
>response I received.
>
>
>Consider the case of describing services and being able to place adverts and
>offers for such services. For example here is an (massively simplified) advert
>requesting a service (all uri prefixes dropped for clarity):
>
>#advert123 :role "buyer";
> :description [:product :roses;
> :quantity [:units :kg; :minValue "100"]].
What does this RDF actually mean? What statement does it make? I think
it's something like:
There may exist an X such that:
Someone wants to buy X AND
There exists a Y such that:
X :description Y AND
Y :product :roses AND
There exists a Z such that:
Y :quantity Z AND
Z :units :kg AND
Z :minValue "100".
There seems to me to be no way of rendering this statement using just
existential quantification.
This may be a compelling use-case, but I don't see any sanction for this
usage in M&S 1.0, and as such would suggest it be deferred to V2.0.
>And here is a supplier who can offer a range of services:
>
>#advert456 :role "seller";
> :description [:product :roses;
> :quantity [:units :kg; :maxValue "500"]].
I think this case can be expressed adequately using just existential
quantification
There exists an X such that:
X is for sale AND
There exists a Y such that:
X :description Y AND
Y :product :roses AND
There exists a Z such that:
Y :quantity Z AND
Z :units :kg AND
Z :maxValue "500".
In this case, I think the meaning can be conveyed using either of the
approaches we have discussed on the list and in the last teleconference [1].
>Now. If we don't have anonymous nodes then we have the following problems.
>
>(1) In the seller advert it would appear that the seller is only advertising a
>single specific (but under-specified) service, #anon12345 or whatever, which
>would be hard to distinguish from an actual service instance like #service42.
I would refer to Pat's explanation, copied in [1]. Skolemization seems to
work just fine here.
>(2) Similarly in the buyer advert instead of describing a template, giving the
>service a URI would make it appear that I am looking for a specific
>service with
>that URI.
I still have not heard a argument that this is sanctioned by the current
M&S 1.0. If this use-case is to be captured, I think the argument for it
needs to be made.
>This is clearly similar to DanC's book buying example.
Yes, I think so.
#g
[1] My response to [2], and apparent convergence on two approaches to
handling anonymous resources; viz. Skolemization/genid, and scoped
variables.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Jul/0131.html
[2] Frank argues that the main goal sanctioned by M&S is statements about
resources that exist but which are not named:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Jul/0124.html
------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne Baltimore Technologies
Strategic Research Content Security Group
<Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com> <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<http://www.baltimore.com>
------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2001 13:08:40 UTC