- From: Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it>
- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 23:44:55 +0100
- To: "Graham Klyne" <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Cc: <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Hi Graham, >This is fine for me. (I think my original comment has been rather >overtaken by developments.) Sorry, but what developments in particular have you in mind? - my following of the wg is pretty sporadic, and I'm not sure I'm clear on the reasoning behind this resolution. The telecon minutes aren't much help : [ Discussion of this entailment; FrankM proposed that the answer is NO. Some people are confused or don't care too much about it. APPROVED: Answer to above entailment is NO. ] Sounds a bit like it was getting close to pub-closing time (globally)... Cheers, Danny. > >#g >-- > >At 02:50 PM 3/11/02 +0000, Brian McBride wrote: >>, >>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 > >------------ >Graham Klyne >GK@NineByNine.org >
Received on Monday, 11 March 2002 18:40:05 UTC