- From: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:15:43 +0200
- To: Bill dehOra <wdehora@cromwellmedia.co.uk>
- CC: www-rdf-comments@w3.org, CC/PP WG list <w3c-ccpp-wg@w3.org>
Bill dehOra wrote:
> >NOTE1 :
> >the 4-uple model (subject, predicate, object, context) could
> >be built *above* RDF,
> >by means of reification.
>
> Could you do it with a binding predicate and keep two triples? Maybe
> something like this:
>
> statement S: (http://w3.org/logo , s1:imageType , s1:GIF ,)
> (http://here.com/foo.rdf, binds, S)
This is exactly what I meant
(though I would more naturally write (S, context, http://here.com/foo.rdf)
but that really doesn't matter ;)
I guess that S should not be stated directly,
we would only have
(S, subject, http://w3.org/logo)
(S, predicate, s1:imageType)
(S, object, s1:GIF)
(S, context, http://here.com/foo.rdf)
(how funny that a native 4-uple model would reify them exactly that way...)
> Then perhaps there is time to add a binding predicate to RDFS?
I think this is the least we could do
The most being integrating 4-uples right into RDF as native...
Pierre-Antoine
--- Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur
Whatever is said in Latin sounds important.
Received on Friday, 23 June 2000 04:14:58 UTC