- From: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@comcast.net>
- Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 19:53:10 -0500
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Sandro Hawke wrote: >>>Why not just reify the statement? >> >>Well, of course one can do that. But the reason people keep coming up >>with suggestions to have a quad or a statement identifier instead of >>using reification has, I think, to do with weaknesses in RDF >>reification. There are several issues that I know about - >> >>1) It is complex - you end up with four triples where all you want to do >>is to reference a statement. > > Three, not four, I think. The domain of rdf:subject is rdf:Statement, > so the rdf:Statement triple need never be said. > Aha! Thanks. > ... Of course any RDF/XML file on the web gives you a URI for the > conjunction of zero or more RDF triples. That's not far from what > folks often want, even if the granularity doesn't always match > people's expectations. > This would work by convention instead of by spec... Cheers, Tom P
Received on Thursday, 18 December 2003 19:51:40 UTC