W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > July 2001

Re: Discussion: #rdfms-identity-anon-resources

From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 11:24:37 -0500
Message-Id: <200107181627.f6IGRYf24708@theinfo.org>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
On Monday, July 9, 2001, at 05:04  PM, pat hayes wrote:

> The problem with this is that it then becomes impossible to 
> provide a single coherent model theory. log:forSome is a good 
> example, in fact. If that means what it apparently is supposed 
> to mean, then any triple using it cannot be interpreted 
> according to the terms used in the RDF M&S, since the latter 
> claims that a triple indicates a relation holds between two 
> things; but log:forSome is a quantifier, which is not a 
> relation. The intended meaning breaks the earlier semantic 
> model.

Well, log:forSome provides a relationship between a graph and a 
resource mentioned in the graph. But this requires having a URI 
for the graph, something which CWM does but is not specified in 
the RDF spec.

> I would argue in the opposite direction. If we want to 
> incorporate expressions which have special meanings, then 
> provide syntactic markers for them, so that a semantics has 
> some handles to attach itself to.

Well, we could always do:

<foo> rdf:type rdfs:AnonymousNode .

Would that be acceptable?

       "Aaron Swartz"      |              The Semantic Web
  <mailto:me@aaronsw.com>  |  <http://logicerror.com/semanticWeb-long>
<http://www.aaronsw.com/> |        i'm working to make it happen
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2001 12:24:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:02 UTC