Re: "Including" other RDF and RDFS files

pat hayes wrote:

>> On Saturday 28 September 2002 04:46, Brian McBride wrote:
>>>  At 20:26 09/09/2002 -0700, Graham Wideman wrote:
>>>  [...]
>>>  >Is there, for example, some convention whereby a block of RDF can say
>>>  >"This block of RDF abides by the RDFS schema to be found here", in 
>>> the
>>>  >same fashion that an ordinary XML file can specify a DTD by which it
>>>  > abides?
>>>  Graham,
>>>  Have a look at isDefinedBy and seeAlso and see if they meet your needs.
>> AFAIK the above properties are mostly for human consumption, although 
>> the
>> first one implies some authority.
>> It would be grate if we had a property with consistent meaning, as in 
>> "this
>> resource completes the graph, providing metadata about the subject".
> The trouble with this is that there is no such thing as 'completing' a 
> graph. The aim of RDF is to provide a notation in which information 
> from many sources can be combined together, so the 'closed-world' kind 
> of picture where graphs have boundaries defined by other graphs really 
> does not fit very well.

Are you saying that document-A does not provide a boundary to the RDF 
graph which is endoced by document-A?   So do all RDF triples in 
whatever document written by whomever just form one big graph and we 
(and RDF MT compliant agents) are to ignore the document boundaries?   
Hmm .... then there would be no boundary between the triples you will 
find by dereferencing <> 
<http://localhost:2187/node.html?at=%3C> and 
the triples you find from dereferencing 
<>  .... wow,  I dont 
know how to make work, .... I must be missing something.  

Seth Russell

Received on Saturday, 28 September 2002 23:50:10 UTC