- From: Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com>
- Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2000 17:06:21 +0000
- To: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@mediaone.net>
- Cc: "RDF interest group" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Jonathan, I for one don't know the answer to your question, but I'm trying to pursue some ideas. In considering and responding to Sergey's comments, I come to think we're looking at different facets of the same problem: I'm focused on expressivity (with partial information), you're focused on inference, I think. In the end, I expect we'll find a solution that adequately captures both, and hence answers your question. #g -- At 01:22 PM 11/2/00 -0500, Jonathan Borden wrote: > > My interpretation of the second statement is that it says the *bag* > > containing the statements that define a [FordEscort] is defined by > > [FordMotorCompany]. My goal is to make that assertion about the (reified) > > statements themselves. (Consider, there may be another bag defined by > > another party containing some of the same statements.) The nearest thing > > in the RDF spec is <Description 'aboutEach=...'>, but I find that lacks a > > corresponding representation in the RDF abstract model. > > And this is the problem. As much as it is good to keep the model as >simple as is possible, the model needs to model the --isa--> chain properly. >Part of this is the 'inheritance' of property values in a fashion similar to >the way an object instance might 'inherit' const values defined as members >of the class. Usually these const values can be static or class members. So >the question is, how is this best modelled in RDF? > >Jonathan Borden >The Open Healthcare Group >http://www.openhealth.org ------------ Graham Klyne (GK@ACM.ORG)
Received on Friday, 3 November 2000 12:20:58 UTC