- From: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@comcast.net>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 08:32:52 -0400
- To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
[David Allsopp]> > > "Thomas B. Passin" wrote: > > > Remember, a reified statement is not considered asserted in RDF. That is, > > the reification is asserted but not the truth of the triple described by the > > rdf:Statement. So you can in fact make statements about other statements > > without having RDF insist on their being asserted. Of course, you only want > > to do that to selected statements, not every one. It seems ridiculous to > > have to think about treating an entire store of triples that way, pending, > > perhaps, a resolution of their veracity. > > I don't think its ridiculous at all. There are lots of situations where > one would need to be able to store the reliability, or the origin, or > timestamp of all your data, in order to later filter out the subset that > you want. Otherwise, when an originally trusted source turns out to be > unreliable, how will you know which individual statements you no longer > trust? > > Of course doing this with actual quad reification doesn't seem a very > attractive solution... That is what I meant, doing it __using standard RDF reification__ seems pretty ugly... Cheers, Tom P
Received on Friday, 26 July 2002 08:34:11 UTC