- From: Butler, Mark <Mark_Butler@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:48:42 +0100
- To: "'Jason Kinner'" <jason_kinner@dynamicdigitalmedia.com>, www-rdf-dspace@w3.org
Hi Jason Okay, I've been thinking this through, and I understand it a bit better now. One approach that helped is the one John Sowa uses in Knowledge Representation i.e. converting the graphs into English sentences. I actually find this pretty helpful, so if we apply this to the first proposal we get (the numbers are for reference later) 1. There exists a Created called urn1 that precedes Situation urn3, hasAction urn2 and hasPatient hdl:1234/123. 2. There exists a Create Action called urn2 that creates hdl:1234/123 3. There exists a Situation called urn3. 4. There exists a Modified Action called urn4 that follows Situation urn3, precedes Situation urn5 and hasPatient hdl:1234/123 5. There exists a Situation called urn5. 6. There exists an Item called hdl:1234/123;1, inContext urn3, with title "My Example" which is a phaseOf hdl:1234/123 7. There exists an Item called hdl:1234/123;2, inContext urn5, with title "Our Example" which is a phaseOf hdl:1234/123 where hasPatient is a subProperty of involves So before I couldn't see the point of urn3 and urn5 as they contain no information apart from their type, but I had overlooked the inContext property of hdl:1234/123;1 and hdl:1234/123;2. So that makes sense now. However I'm still confused about why we need sentences 1 and 2 - can't we combine them into a single sentence e.g. 1.5 There exists a Create Action called urn1 that precedes situation urn3, that creates hdl:1234/123 i.e. that is more similar to sentence 4? Why are sentences 1 and 2 different to 4? Also I'm afraid I've got to pick on some of your terminology ... > I'll grant you that there is complexity, but I feel it is a > valid model. > The need for Situations is that they represent the resting state of a > portion of the model (the existential facet) /between/ events. Lagoze et al use the term existential facet, but I don't like it - "facet" has a very specific meaning in the library community - for example see http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabulary/aat/about.html Lagoze's definition is "From the perspective of first-order logic, the existential facet corresponds to there exists a situation in which an instance of the entity exists with a property set and the universal facet corresponds to for all situations in the description the entity exists with a certain property set." So the "existential facet" is their approach to implementing contexts. > Events > and Actions represent the kinetic portion of the model, I don't believe the model has a kinetic portion, that's a term you would use when talking about oscillatory systems. Better: "Events and Actions represent the processes and Situations represent the contexts"? thanks, Dr Mark H. Butler Research Scientist HP Labs Bristol mark-h_butler@hp.com Internet: http://www-uk.hpl.hp.com/people/marbut/
Received on Friday, 6 June 2003 06:49:07 UTC