- From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
- Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 10:27:42 -0800
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
From: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> > OK, but to completely fit in with M&S something like the following is needed: > > 1/ There is exactly one triple with a given pred, sub, and obj, > so there can be at most one element of Statements with a given > pred, sub, and obj. > > 2/ For each triple, consisting of a given predicate, subject, and object, > there is at most one resource that is the sub of four elements of > Statements; one with pred rdf:type and obj rdf:Statement, one with pred > rdf:predicate and obj predicate, one with pred rdf:subject and obj > subject, and one with pred rdf:object and obj object. Hmmm .. you seem intransigent on this point. Good thing I'm not a member of the WG, because I couldn't live with that. . > But why not use the current M&S stuff as it is? If you want multiple > ``reifications'', then why not use some other mechanism? Which is a bigger change to M&S than the fix that people like me are calling for. > > <rdf:description> > > <rdf:type>:Statement</rdf:type> > > <rdf:subject>:Gore</rdf:subject> > > <rdf:predicate>:wonThe</rdf:predicate> > [ <rdf:object>:election</rdf:object> ] > > <log:truthValue>False</log:truthValue> > > </rdf:description> > > > > which holds for all such statings. > > > > But I could also write: > > > > <rdf:description> > > <rdf:type>:Statement</rdf:type> > > <rdf:subject>:Gore</rdf:subject> > > <rdf:predicate>:wonThe</rdf:predicate> > > <dc:author>:Seth</dc:author> > > <log:truthValue>False</log:truthValue> > > </rdf:description> > > > > which holds for a smaller collection of statings. > > HUH? What is the difference here? How do you distinguish between these > two uses? As far as I can see both resources have equivalent status as far > as RDF is concerned. Did you miss the extra restraint <dc:author>:Seth</dc:author> in the latter case ? Do the following two nodes refer to the same thing or "have equivalent status as far as RDF is concerned" ? [a :Book; title "Knowledge Representation"; dc:author "John F. Sowa"] [a :Book; title "Knowledge Representation"; dc:author "John F. Sowa"; :ownedBy "Seth Russell" ;sittingOn :MyDesk] Seth Russell
Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2002 13:31:23 UTC