RE: definition/assertion (WAS rdf as a base for other languages)

> > a triple connecting a parent with a child, in a
subject-predicate-object format of person-parentOf-child, leaves much
unsaid -- a parent may  
> > have several children. If predicates serve as functions, then this
"function" might not have a well-defined value precisely because the
value 
> > could be any of a number of children. Of course one could make the
object a list, but that too has drawbacks. Logic long ago handled >
> > these matters by distinguishing between relations and functions. But
because relations can be multi-placed and do not always fall neatly >
> > into the subject-predicate-object framework, they are anathema to
many, to the detriment of the representational tools. 


> To be fair to RDF, I think itis based on the relational intepretation.


A quick glance at the RDF spec shows you are probably right. Point
taken. But then I wonder how one could distinguish a relation from a
well-defined function in RDF ...