W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > February 2002

Re: linking reification to reified (was: Re: reification "subagenda")

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 10:33:38 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 06:52 PM 2/14/02 -0500, Pat Hayes wrote:
>It occurs to me that the obvious way to do that would be to have another 
>special property <rdf:source> of a reification, so the 'normal' case would 
>be 5 triples (a quintriplet?) rather than 4, where the extra one links the 
>subject to its source, using an appropriate URI, eg (check it out)
>      _:r <rdf:type> <rdf:Statement> .
>      _:r <rdf:subject> _:x .
>      _:r <rdf:predicate> <http://example.org/dt#USdate> .
>      _:r <rdf:object> "05-08-67" .
>      _:r <rdf:source> <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/n3/p7.nt>
>Then we really could say some MT stuff about what it has to mean, eg this 
>is *false* if that graph doesn't contain the described triple.

I think this is a great example of what *could* be done with reification.

But I don't think that means *we* (i.e. this working group) should feel 
compelled to do it.

But if different folks do different things, the agreed-upon 'quad' 
vocabulary may be the thing that helps the various ideas to be cross-related.

(Pat, I think I'm mostly agreeing with sentiments you've expressed here and 


Graham Klyne                    MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research              <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
Received on Friday, 15 February 2002 06:40:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:10 UTC