- From: Dirk-Willem van Gulik <dirkx@webweaving.org>
- Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 16:36:34 -0800 (PST)
- To: Stefano Mazzocchi <stefano@apache.org>
- Cc: Eric Jain <Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch>, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > > I would be quite surprised if I were the only person on this planet with > > this problem... > Oh, you are not. Aye - another +1 here. > And I have to add, context is important not only in terms of location > (space) but also version (time). > reifications and that I think that the fact that they are not practical > might be a matter of implementation, not of a spec. Implementation of some form of Context - be it source, provenance, time, version - and beeing able to address a set of facts/triples by means of say, the file/uri they came from, in facts makes the creation of practical tools required for an actual operational system much easier. > I think it would be a mistake to specify what context is by harcoding > one more metadata field to every statement. What next? what about > licensing restrictions on the time about the change of the context of > the statement? > > the queries will get hairy, agreed, but context is something you know > when you query, what you know where you enter data is just metadata > about statements, and that's exactly what reification is all about. Context is hairy - the real world is hairy - but that is not a reason not to go out and tackle it ;) Dw.
Received on Friday, 19 November 2004 13:06:38 UTC