- From: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
- Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 12:51:24 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
[Wolfram Conen] I haven't found too much in the spec that forbids to interpret that what is being called "reification" in RDF M&S as nesting (and only as nesting). Yes, I think you're right. A lot of the arguments about this issue are based on the misconception that the advocates of "reification" were talking about quotation. The rdf:quote mechanism clearly shows that one doesn't actually have to reify to achieve the desired effect, which is to block the inexorable triple-inference rule. The good news is that a consensus is emerging, based on the idea of drawing a line around an RDF substructure with a note saying "Don't automatically infer the stuff in here." The bad news is that there are too many terms being used for this idea, including "context," "nesting," and "reification." These terms have lots of distracting associations with other topics. Some fairly neutral party (Lynn Stein?) should pick a term, and then we can all agree to use it, and turn our attention to the details of how to indicate nesting, or whatever we call it. -- Drew McDermott
Received on Tuesday, 5 June 2001 12:51:31 UTC