- From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 13:57:22 +0000
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 01:35:48 +0100, Reto Bachmann-Gmuer wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > <rdf:Description rdf:about="#u1"> > ~ <dc:language rdf:ID="r1">EN</dc:language> > </rdf:Description> > > is the same graph as > > <rdf:Statement rdf:ID="r1"> > ~ <rdf:subject rdf:resource="#ul" /> > ~ <rdf:predicate rf:resource="dc:languages" /> > ~ <rdf:object>EN</rdf:object> > </rdf:Statement> > <rdf:Description rdf:about="#u1" dc:language="EN"/> I was under the impression that those gave different graphs. The first is #u1 -- dc:language -> EN I think the second is _:r1 -- rdf:subject -> #ul _:r1 -- rdf:predicate -> dc:languages _:r1 -- rdf:object -> "EN" #u1 -- dc:language -> "EN" where _:r1 is suppsed to represent the b-node, but that has not reified the triple, its made a statement about the subject of it. > do you think reification is messed up in RDF or just the way it is > serialized in RDF/XML? Well, standard RDF has no real way of refering to reified triples (other than by exploding them) as it has no support for quads - which is where this started. - Steve
Received on Thursday, 6 November 2003 08:57:23 UTC