Re: time-varying properties

I think of this as a matter of "context", which could include "trust".
In MKR, I could say
(1a) at time=1983 John has height = 60;
(2a) at time=1993 John has height = 70;
and conclude that
(3a) at time=2003 John has height = 70;

The RDF semantics would be (in MKR)
(1b) at time=1983 John has height += 60;
(2b) at time=1993 John has height += 70;
concluding that
(3c) at time=2003 John has height = [60,70];

Dick McCullough
knowledge := man do identify od existent done;
knowledge haspart proposition list;

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Seth Ladd" <seth@brivo.net>
To: "www-rdf-interest at W3C" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 8:00 AM
Subject: Re: time-varying properties


> 
> On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 10:34, Dan Brickley wrote:
> > * Richard H. McCullough <rhm@cdepot.net> [2003-06-25 07:13-0700]
> > > 
> > > Given the triples
> > > (1)    John  height  60
> > > (2)    John  height  70
> > > can RDF say that (2) replaces (1) -- as opposed to 
> > > both (2) and (1) being true?
> > > 
> > > Can OWL say that (2) replaces (1)?
> 
> Because RDF statements exist in an Open World, there is nothing stopping
> those two statements from existing at the same time.  This is because
> the web doesn't prohibit any particular assertion.  On the web, it can
> be said that I'm a dog and a man. :)
> 
> Having said that, I've gotten around this problem in my applications by
> moving my application context from one graph to another.  If I decide
> that John's height is now 70, I assert that in a new graph, and then
> move my application to that one.  Not pretty.
> 
> This might be solved a little nicer when people start working on trust
> mechanisms for RDF.
> 
> Seth
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2003 12:46:18 UTC