W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > December 2000

Re: Statements/Reified statements

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 10:37:37 -0800
Message-ID: <3A2A92F1.C2F882B0@robustai.net>
To: Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com>
CC: Damien Morton <Morton@dennisinter.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3c.org
Graham Klyne wrote:

> Personally, I tend to agree with you, but the RDF M&S currently uses
> rdf:_1, rdf:_2, etc.
> However, the RDF M&S does not (cannot?) prevent one defining a different
> structure for describing ordered collections -- such as "link list" as you
> suggest (but beware: the "links" here are illusory --- don't think of them
> like C structures).  But be aware that that approach too will suffer from a
> requirement for re-writing if you wish to insert a new element (though not
> as many rewrites as the numbered property approach).

Strangely enough this nasty problem could be fixed, if the RDF data model allowed
for real numbers in rdf:_x.

But in any case, I stand with you calling for the allowance of collecting
statements apart from bags via explicit reification:

[c] ---rdfc:asserts--->[id, s, p, o]

It's direct, its useful, it's efficient!

Is there any dissent?

Seth Russell
Received on Sunday, 3 December 2000 13:34:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:27 UTC