- From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 23:13:08 +0100
- To: phayes@ai.uwf.edu
- Cc: timbl@w3.org, drew.mcdermott@yale.edu, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
[...]
> Seems to me that all this can be done in one fairly simple way, by
> allowing the subject and object of RDF triples to themselves be RDF
> triples (not reifications of triples, but actual triples.) These
> 'inner' triples are not asserted, and the 'verb' of the triple that
> points to them provides the needed labelling. The distinction between
> subject and object provides the distinction between subnesting and
> nesting, much in the way that LISP uses CDRs to indicate list members
> and encodes sublists in the CAR. This would be a single, simple
> change to RDF which would support the kind of processing that CWM and
> Jos Deroos's Euler system are doing, and indeed would provide enough
> flexibility to encode abitrary list structures, so could easily
> accomodate, say, KIF syntax; it would leave all current RDF
> unchanged;
there of course possibilities e.g.
(using N3 notation)
[[ has [ is :s1; :p1 [ is s2; p2 :o2]];
has [ is :s3; :p3 :o3]].
where 'has' means something like '(statement)set membership'
and 'is' means something like 'being the representative for'
then statement2 is 'nested' in statement1
whereas statement1 and statement2 or on 'equal feet'
--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2001 17:13:34 UTC