- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2002 22:21:24 -0500
- To: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- Cc: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
* Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org> [2002-02-03 16:05-0500] > Sorry, I need a "real" (not abstract) example. This is a formalisation of the old 'stating vs statement' characterisation of the confusion surrounding M+S's notion of an rdf:Statement. For a real example, pick any interesting triple from some worldy use case. Create two descriptions of a bnode of rdf:type rdf:Statement using the pre/subj/obj from that tripe, i and attach differing 'who said this and when they said it' information to each. The question is really about whether the class rdf:Statement has members that are uniquely picked out by their pred/subj/obj characteristics, or whether that class can have two members with the self-same pred/subj/object values. To avoid mixing this up with the literal datatyping issue, it is probably best to use examples where the object of the statement is a URI rather than a literal. Dan > > --Frank > > Brian McBride wrote: > > > We have to decide on Dan Brickley's equality test. Does > > > > _:s1 <rdf:type> <rdf:Statement> . > > _:s1 <rdf:subject> <subject> . > > _:s1 <rdf:predicate> <predicate> . > > _:s1 <rdf:object> <object> . > > > > _:s2 <rdf:type> <rdf:Statement> . > > _:s2 <rdf:subject> <subject> . > > _:s2 <rdf:predicate> <predicate> . > > _:s2 <rdf:object> <object> . > > > > _:s1 <property> "property" . > > > > entail: > > > > _:s2 <property> "property" . > > > > Brian > > > > > -- > Frank Manola The MITRE Corporation > 202 Burlington Road, MS A345 Bedford, MA 01730-1420 > mailto:fmanola@mitre.org voice: 781-271-8147 FAX: 781-271-875 >
Received on Sunday, 3 February 2002 22:24:26 UTC