Re: Common RDF parser bug?

"Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN (by way of Ralph R. Swick )" wrote:

> However, I just agree with Brian on the main topic : it may be useful in
> many cases to *partially* describe a statement. To make an example
> similar to Brian's...


The example that I reported aginst the validator was one where there was
_more than one_ rdf:subject, rdf:predicate and rdf:object, _not_ a
"partial reification" example.  Some folks seem perfectly happy with
that, but they are suggesting fairly sophisticated inference to
disentangle the triples; not everyone is going to want that sort of
solution, IMHO.

Regards,

David Allsopp


> <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://champin.net/">
>   <foo:contains>
>     <rdf:Statement>
>       <rdf:predicate rdf:resource="&foo;phoneNumber"/>
>       <rdf:subject rdf:parseType="Resource">
>         <vcard:EMAIL rdf:resource="mailto:pa@champin.net"/>
>       </rdf:subject>
>     </rdf:Statement>
>   </foo:contains>
> </rdf:Description>
> 
> meaning something like
> "The page <http://champin.net/> contains the information about the phone
> number of the person with e-mail address pa@champin.net"
> 
> or more concisely : "You can find my phone number on my homepage"
> 
> whatever that phone number is ! It may change, the above RDF is still
> valid.


> At 13:43 19/01/2002 -0500, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> >The following defect report against the W3C's ARP-based RDF Validator:
> >
> >  [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-validator/2002Jan/0304.html
> >
> >suggests a violation of the following part of M&S:
> >
> >[[
> >When a resource represents a reified statement; that is, it has an
> >RDF:type property with a value of RDF:Statement, then that resource
> >must have exactly one RDF:subject property, one RDF:object property,
> >and one RDF:predicate property.
> >]]



-- 
/d{def}def/u{dup}d[0 -185 u 0 300 u]concat/q 5e-3 d/m{mul}d/z{A u m B u
m}d/r{rlineto}d/X -2 q 1{d/Y -2 q 2{d/A 0 d/B 0 d 64 -1 1{/f exch d/B
A/A z sub X add d B 2 m m Y add d z add 4 gt{exit}if/f 64 d}for f 64 div
setgray X Y moveto 0 q neg u 0 0 q u 0 r r r r fill/Y}for/X}for showpage

Received on Monday, 28 January 2002 11:43:22 UTC