- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 07:00:37 -0400
- To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@home.com> Subject: Re: Properties of Properties Question Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 06:07:55 -0400 > [Dickinson, Ian J] > > > From: Thomas B. Passin [mailto:tpassin@home.com] > > > Well, the assertion is a triple so once you reify it you can > > > association information with it by making assertions about the > > > reified statement. Isn't > > > that precisely what reification is for? > > Yes, that's what I had previously assumed, but if a reified statement is > > still a statement then it contradicts this claim from Peter > Patel-Schneider > > : > > > > >> (In RDF terms > > >> this would probably be using a statement as the > > >> subject of another > > >> statement, which can't be done in RDF.) > > > > which he re-inforced with the following: > > > > >> This can't be done in DAML+OIL > > >> because assertions cannot have associated information. > > > > Hence my confusion. > > Well it's so or not so, depending on how you look at it. You can't make an > assertion about the original statement because it does not exist as an > atomic thing with a node, id, or what have you. So that's true. You can > make an assertion about the reified statement, but that reification is not > literally the "original" statement, but instead a different one (or a > different node if you like). Restated, what you can do is given a statement (triple) <s, p, o> make an assertion about a resource that belongs to the class Statement, is related to s via a subject link, to p via a predicate link, and to o via an object link. Whether this has anything significant to do with the original statement (triple) is left as an exercise to the reader, certainly there is only a very weak (at best) relationship between the two in RDF. > The reification of the original statement is not actually "a" statement, > instead it is a package of three [four] of them. Still, it can be a node in the > graph. It would be an anonymous node so far as I can see. I remember > seeing illustrations of making assertions about reifications of statements > in the M&S. > > Cheers, > > Tom P Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2001 07:01:25 UTC