- From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
- Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 13:56:35 -0700
- To: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@home.com>, <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@home.com> > [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. Yes, definitely. I think most implementations of RDF actually have this identifier already; all they need to do is expose it to the user. >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. Personally I don't think think it's necessary to have a globally unique ID for each triple and it may actually be misleading. A triple only has meaning within a context. If I assert the triple {:Goor :won :Election2000} it has a totally different meaning than if the US Electorical College had asserted that same triple. I suppose there are context independant triples ... but I haven't personally run into any yet ... have you? I think the ID of a triple should be stamped locally by the person reading or writing the triple within some context. Seth Russell
Received on Saturday, 13 October 2001 16:56:55 UTC