Re: Named graphs etc

> >>>
> >>> Maybe it is also helpful in this context to use the statement/stating
> >>> terminology:
> >>>
> >>> 1. RDF Statements don't involve speech acts. So statements are
> >>> contained in
> >>> graphs that describe themselves as :G1 x:GraphQualificationProperty
> >>> x:unasserted or are described somewhere else somehow as unasserted.
> >>
> >> Right.
> >>
> >>> 2. RDF Stating: Through a speech act a statement becomes a stating.
> >>> So
> >>> a
> >>> stating is the result of an agent claiming a Statement.
> >>
> >> Not sure I follow this. Can you provide an example?
> >>
> >
> > Taking Pat's "asserting is a speech act", I tried to link the existing
> > terminology "Statement/Stating" used inconsistently today to your
> > x:GraphQualificationProperty. I think the term RDF Stating is used
> > mostly,
> > when speaking about agents claiming stuff in an distributed, "social"
> > environment. The term RDF Statement more in situations where RDF is
> > just
> > used as datamodel / knowledge model without taking agents and speech
> > acts
> > into account. Thinking more about it and seeing that we just discuss
> > the
> > agent scenario, the idea of somehow linking it with the
> > x:GraphQualificationProperty doesn't appear that convincing any more
> > ;-(
> >
>
> Hmmm....  couldn't one view the insertion of graph qualification
> statements specifying assertion and authentication as being
> equivalent to a "speech act", the graph being the utterance?
>

Also hmmm ... and I think we should forward this question to Pat.

1. If "assertion = speech act", the assertion *has* to take place in a
"context" for example a point in time.
Thus it is tempting to conclude that a graph is asserted, if it (1)
describes itself or (2) is described somewhere else with the properties
dc:author and dc:date.

2. Publishing an unasserted graph on the Web wouldn't be a speech act. What
would it be??

Correct me where I'm wrong.

Chris


> ???
>
> Patrick
>
>
> --
>
> Patrick Stickler
> Nokia, Finland
> patrick.stickler@nokia.com
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 10 March 2004 09:08:29 UTC