- From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 22:39:17 +0100
- To: connolly@w3.org
- Cc: aswartz@swartzfam.com, www-rdf-logic@w3.org, phayes@ai.uwf.edu
> [Dan] > And I think there's a place for reification when > it comes to relating logic to communication protocols > (but I'm not sure about that). Depends on what you call reification of course ... Suppose we have an object R which is a *representative* for a resource r. That R object is actually an URI-of-r object that can talk via HTTP with r. Actually a web browser is such a kind of R object ... (but I also made R objects as representatives for remote Java objects) Anything that happens with representative R, happens with resource r. So r is kind of engine-available via R (and R is not a reification of r). So the kind of *in-place (or in-circle)* RDF nodes I mentioned before can be R objects (or RDF graphs containing such R objects). -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Thursday, 5 April 2001 16:39:40 UTC