- From: Jonas Liljegren <jonas@rit.se>
- Date: 21 Nov 2000 19:47:37 +0100
- To: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
- Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, RDF-IG <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net> writes: > If I understand your case we have: > > Context 1: URI1 [S1, P1, O1] > Context 2: URI1 [S2, P2, O2] > > If the reified statement refers to the entity (the abstract thing) > and the contexts are aggregated, then I think we could infer: > > S1 --isEquivalentTo--> S2 > P1 --isEquvalentTo--> P2 > O1 --isEquivalentTo--> O2 > > But if the reified statement refers to the representation of the > entity relationship, then somebody used the wrong URI. My point is that people will sometimes use the wrong URI for a resouce. Applications will have to handle such cases. We have here two views on what the resource denotes. It must be allowed to represent those two views in the same RDF application. > I'm so confused.... I did it on purpose. ;-) -- / Jonas Liljegren The Wraf project http://www.uxn.nu/wraf/ Sponsored by http://www.rit.se/
Received on Tuesday, 21 November 2000 13:46:32 UTC