- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 14:50:53 +0000
- To: GK@Dial.pipex.com
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
,
In
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2000Sep/0032.html
you raised an issue which was captured in
http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-identity-of-statements
as
[[[
There is a question whether or not there can be two different statements
with the same subject, object and property. Most people seem to say "no". I
have suggested that this should be allowed because it can be expressed in
reified RDF statements and that there should be a 1:1 correspondence
between what can be expressed in an RDF model and its reification.
]]]
As recorded in
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Feb/0476.html
the RDFCore WG has resolved:
<stmt1> <rdf:type> <rdf:Statement> .
<stmt1> <rdf:subject> <subject> .
<stmt1> <rdf:predicate> <predicate> .
<stmt1> <rdf:object> <object> .
<stmt2> <rdf:type> <rdf:Statement> .
<stmt2> <rdf:subject> <subject> .
<stmt2> <rdf:predicate> <predicate> .
<stmt2> <rdf:object> <object> .
<stmt1> <property> <foo> .
does not entail:
<stmt2> <property> <foo> .
This is a formal way of saying that two reified statements with the same
subject, predicate and object can be different resources.
Please could you respond to this message, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org
indicating whether this is an acceptable resolution of this issue.
Brian McBride
RDFCore co-chair
Received on Monday, 11 March 2002 09:54:54 UTC