Re: A triple is not unique.

Jonathan Borden wrote:

> I think you are mixing up the triple and the reification of the triple. The
> triple is unique but its reification need not be unique.
>
> (Bush wonThe Election)
>
> (SethsStmt type Statement)
> (SethsStmt subject Bush)
> (SethsStmt predicate wonThe)
> (SethsStmt object Election)
>
> (ECStmt type Statement)
> (ECStmt subject Bush)
> (ECStmt predicate wonThe)
> (ECStmt object Election)

Well I think you're right, that solves this particular
problem and adhears to the current M&S.  However I still
have two troubels:

1) Doing inference:  The inference paths on refied
statements are different than on non reified statements.  If
I want to reason in the context of Seth's statements, I
cannot also reason in the context of what MyMemory believes
with the same algorithms.  But I realize that this is more
just an implementation nightmare than a problem with the
spec.

2) Assigning statements to contexts:  Again another
implementation nightmare if we are to adhear to the
reification technique of M&S.  In MyMemory every statement
can belong to any number of contexts.  Saying a statement
belongs to a context is a statement about a statement and
thefore would require the set of four statements.  I will
get lost in my underwair if i want to browse around my
different contexts.

topic: Seth Russell
needsHelpWith: MyMemory

topic: MyMemory
abilityTo: (and: (read: RDF) (write: RDF))
abilityTo: (browse: Context)

topic: MyMemory abilityTo (browse: Context)
if: can be designed
then: will exist

topic: (MyMemory abilityTo (browse:context)) if: (can be
designed)
is: difficult

Received on Tuesday, 21 November 2000 20:36:51 UTC