Re: How do RDF and Formal Logic fit together?

[Seth Russell]

> From: "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
>
> > I agree that would be great, but unfortunately RDF isn't quite good
> > enough for that. Its just *too simple* to be useable as a general
> > syntax model. If it had used quadruples instead of triples, or had
> > some kind of context or scoping mechanism, or had some way to string
> > together sequences without forcing the use of reification; any of
> > those would have worked; but plain graphs just don't cut the mustard.
>
> Well the pentuples of a mentograph would do the job, me thinks:
>
> 1) subject
> 2) property
> 3) object
> 4) statement ID
> 5) sequence
>
> ... which when you add some other needed typing info to make the data
> processing practical it ends up being a 7-tuple  see
> http://robustai.net/mentography/SemStructure3.gif   But you can still draw
> them as labeled directed pseudographs with an optional new sequence
> attribute labeling the arcs: http://robustai.net/mentography/sequence.gif
>

You know, when you construct a computer model of an RDF graph, it's
practically impossible to do without having a triple be some kind of object
or entity.  It's a row in a database, or an edge definition showing source
and target, or a tuple (subject, predicate, object), or something that gives
an (local) identity to each statement.  Surely it wouldn't be much of a step
to generalize that in the model and specify a way to map from the inevitable
local identifier to a globally unique URI.

Cheers,

Tom P

Received on Saturday, 13 October 2001 15:54:21 UTC