Kingsley, (01)
I have a question about one of your comments: see below. (02)
Thanks,
Leo (03)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kingsley Idehen
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 5:48 PM
To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] URIs [was: Truth]
... (04)
You are moving all over the place with me here. Have I implied that
Triple patterns are the only vehicle for Hyperdata? And FWIW you can use
reification syntax to keep statements about anything down to triples,
the ultimate problem is the current reification vocabulary doesn't work
on the engineering side of things, so alternatives are needed if we
don't want to increase computing costs across the board. There's work
taking place that will soon be published with engineered examples in the
not too distant future.
[Leo: ] What is this work? Can you point me to it? Reification has always been
an issue because there's limited semantics for it, unless you provide an
ontology for reifying, I guess. Statements require some propositional attitude
semantics, no? The syntactic graph structure is there, for reification, but
that's it, right? This is my understanding. (05)
I refer to: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#Reif: (06)
"A reification of a triple does not entail the triple, and is not entailed by
it. (The reification only says that the triple token exists and what it is
about, not that it is true. ..." (07)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (08)
|