Re: How do RDF and Formal Logic fit together?

From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@home.com>
Subject: Re: How do RDF and Formal Logic fit together? 
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 11:24:51 -0400

> [Sean B. Palmer]
> 
> > > Yes, and my point is simply that you have already reified
> > > all the statements de facto within the computer, why throw
> > > that information away (at least, when it matters) when you
> > > serialize it?
> >
> > Are you stating that when a processor comes across a reified triple, it
> > should store it in <s, p, o, id> form internally? If not, if you
> > recursively processed in-out a piece of RDF, you'd end up with a horrible
> > reified mess.
> >
> 
> No, I'm saying that most processors would in fact store the equivalent of
> <s, p, o, id> as you say (although the id might be implicit, for example,
> the position in an array), so why throw that information away or make it
> hard to access when you serialize?  Even though <s, p, o, id> might be used
> internally, the rdf model doesn't actually contain that construct, does it?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Tom P
> 

Perhaps for a reason similar to the reason that you should throw away
white-space when inputting RDF triples?

If the information is not sanctioned by the RDF specification (either M&S
or the model theory or whatever), then it is not part of RDF and should not
be in a serialization.   Putting it in only makes the job of processing RDF
harder---what is an RDF processor supposed to do with it sees such a quad?

Now if you are saying that RDF specification should be changed so that this
information is part of RDF, then go ahead and make a proposal.

Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Bell Labs Research

Received on Sunday, 14 October 2001 13:20:04 UTC