- From: Jonas Liljegren <jonas@rit.se>
- Date: 23 Nov 2000 09:51:18 +0100
- To: Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com>
- Cc: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>, ML RDF-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3c.org>
Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com> writes:
> I think it is necessary to distinguish between 'statings' and
> 'quotings' of statements. Reification is a way to do that within
> the RDF model as currently defined. Are there others?
Every statement is stated in a specific context. The stating is true
within the context and othervise false.
One common way to implement RDF is to have a fact boolean for every
statement indicating if it's only a reified statement or the actual
statement.
But it would be better to indicate in which models/contexts the
statement is true.
This means that a quoting of a statement not considered to be true can
be done by refereing to a statement belonging to another
model/context.
This means that instead of four, we have five:
{ uri, pred, subj, obj, model }
Or, just don't consider any statements true, unless they explicitly is
placed in a trusted model.
--
/ Jonas Liljegren
The Wraf project http://www.uxn.nu/wraf/
Sponsored by http://www.rit.se/
Received on Thursday, 23 November 2000 03:50:11 UTC