RE: What do the ontologists want

At 09:31 PM 5/17/01 -0500, pat hayes wrote:
>>in RDF:
>>
>>3: a statement is not a predicate.
>>4: a statement is not a resource.
>
>? I thought a resource could be anything (?) I am still trying to find out 
>what 'resource' means, but Dan Connolly tells me that:
>the standard [definition of resource] is RFC2396:
>
>[[[
>       Resource
>          A resource can be anything that has identity.
>          [...]
>]]]
>
>which seems to cover just about anything in the universe, certainly 
>including RDF statements.

But if a statement does not have an identity?

Dan's/Mel99 model theory had:

    N: the set of resources
    S: the set of statements, a subset of (NxNxN)

[...]
>>6: a resource clearly doesn't need to be reified to have a statement
>>made about it.
>
>Not obvious to me at present.

What does it mean to reify a _resource_?


#g


------------
Graham Klyne
GK@NineByNine.org

Received on Friday, 18 May 2001 08:54:49 UTC