- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:58:28 +0100
- To: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@virgilio.it>
- Cc: "pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
At 07:28 PM 6/25/02 +0200, Danny Ayers wrote: > >WHY is this perceived as a problem? What use is there in referring > >to edges? > >hmm... > >[the cat] --[sat on]--> [the mat] > | > [for] > | > V > [an hour] > >could currently be broken down something like : > >[sat on] --[subclass]--> [sat on for an hour] > >[the cat] --[sat on for an hour]--> [the mat] > >[sat on for an hour] --[cardinality]--> [1] > >but it seems less clunky to say : > >[sat on for an hour] --[instanceOf]--> [sat on] > >[the cat] --[sat on for an hour]--> [the mat] Then if I say: [the dog] --[sat on for an hour]--> [the cat] this is clearly another instance of [sat on for an hour]. I.e. we're back to where we started. #g ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Tuesday, 25 June 2002 16:19:50 UTC