- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 20:09:29 -0400
- To: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
>From: "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu> > >> >I fail to see how the triple refered to by a reification quad is *not* >dark >> >in the graph which contains it. For example: >> > >> >In a graph containing this reification quad: >> > >> >_:1 rdf:type rdf:Statement. >> >_:1 rdf:subject foo:S. >> >_:1 rdf:predicate foo:V. >> >_:1 rdf:object foo:O. >> > >> >The triple: >> > >> >foo:S foo:V foo:O. >> > >> >Is *certainly* dark. >> >> Well, its not even there, so I would say the questions of its >> darkness or lightness don't even arise. > >Point taken. I'm just trying to figure out if we can consider the RDF >reification quad to be a dark triple relative to the document (graph) in >which that quad exists .... or not? Seems to me that you are stopping short >of actually saying that .... why? Er...because it would be false? Look, a dark triple is supposed to be a triple which IS PRESENT in an RDF graph, but for some reason isn't being asserted there. So a triple which isn't even in the graph can't be said to be 'dark' in any useful sense. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2002 20:09:31 UTC