- From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
- Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 15:53:06 -0700
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: <sandro@w3.org>, <sean@mysterylights.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
From: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
> You could forbid all self-referential sentences. However, some
> self-referential sentences are interesting, and forbidding any form of
> self-reference goes against the RDF philosophy of being able to say
> anything about anything.
Well, it seems to me, that right now we can't even say in RDF that {<A>
ex:notType <B>} where 'ex:notType' is the negation of 'rdf:type'. Can we?
If so, how? If not, what do you mean that RDF's has a philosophy of being
able to say anything about anything?
Also, can you privide a single 'interesting' case of ?x and ?y in the form:
<S1>~{<S1> ?x ?y}
where the '~' indicates that <S1> is the identity of the RDF triple
{<S1> ?x ?y} ?
I can't think of any.
Seth Russell
http://robustai.net/sailor/
Received on Saturday, 24 August 2002 18:54:01 UTC