- From: McBride, Brian <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 18:13:06 -0000
- To: "'Jonas Liljegren'" <jonas@rit.se>
- Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>, RDF-IG <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> Yes. That has been suggested before. But that means that you can't
> use reification in the way examplified in RDF M&S.
Just to be clear, can you point out the specific examples in M&S that
don't work with the statements as facts interpretation.
For the record, section 5, the formal model section of M&S states:
There is a set called Statements, each element of which is a triple
of the form {pred, sub, obj}
That says that each Statement is a triple of the form (s,p,o). A
triple in mathematics is uniquely determined by its three components.
>
> My vote is on allowing identical statements with diffrent identities.
>
Can you clarify what that sentence means :) How can two identical things
have different identity? If they have different identity, they are not
identical!
> And you can't avoid that with statements distributed over several
> models over the net.
Different representations of statements. In my world model, statements
are abstract and don't have a location on the net. Perhaps yours is
different.
Brian
Received on Sunday, 19 November 2000 13:13:11 UTC