- From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 19:52:55 +0000
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 09:43:15PM +0200, Dmitry Borodaenko wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 06:13:31PM +0000, Bill de h?ra wrote: > > Otherwise tho' being able to make statements about a graph is a major > > use-case atm for me. But there doesn't seem to be any legal while > > sane way to do this - reflection/reification is not how I want to go > > about it, even if I was sure the semantics would pan out (reification > > to identify a graph?). > > How about treating a graph as a Bag of Statements? Definitely legal, and > I don't see how is it insane. I don't understand, why so many RDF users > and implementers shy away from reification? The RDF provided mechaism for reification is pretty messed up IMHO. However graph level context/model storage is pretty logical and quite powerful. - Steve
Received on Wednesday, 5 November 2003 14:52:57 UTC