- From: Miles Sabin <MSabin@interx.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 13:44:38 -0000
- To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
According to rdfms 5: Formal Model for RDF, 3. There is a subset of Resources called Properties In rdfms 2.1: Basic RDF Model, Resources are always named by URIs plus optional anchor IDs. In 3.1: Container Model, The membership relationship between [a] container resource and the resources that belong in the collection is defined by a set of properties defined expressly for this purpose. These membership properties are named simply "_1", "_2", "_3", etc. Jointly these seem to imply that each of "_1", "_2", "_3" are resources and hence have a URI(-ref). Given that they're part of core RDF I'd expect them to have cannonical absolute URI(-ref)s. What would they be? Something like, http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax#_1" http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax#_2" etc.? Also, in 4.1 Modelling Statements, To model statements RDF defines the following properties: ... predicate The predicate property identifies the original property in the modeled statement. The value of the predicate property is a resource representing the specific property in the original statement. I'm not entirely clear on whether or not the resource which _is_ a property (from clause 3 in the formal model) is intended to be identical to the resource which _represents_ a property in a reification (from the clause in 4.1 quoted above). Pretty clearly things can represent themselves, but I'm not sure that that's the intent of the definition here. In particular, it contrasts with the neighbouring definitions of the 'subject' and 'object' properties, both of which appear to reuse the URIs from the reifyee and don't make any mention of any sort of representing resource. What's the correct interpretation? Do properties appear directly in reifications? Or indirectly via a distinct representative resource? Cheers, Miles -- Miles Sabin InterX Internet Systems Architect 5/6 Glenthorne Mews +44 (0)20 8817 4030 London, W6 0LJ, England msabin@interx.com http://www.interx.com/
Received on Monday, 22 January 2001 08:45:20 UTC