ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] URIs [was: Truth]

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Obrst, Leo J." <lobrst@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 13:45:12 +0000
Message-id: <FDFBC56B2482EE48850DB651ADF7FEB019343049@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Michael,     (01)

Sure I understand the distinction. Property reification by making a class for a 
relation is a way to get around the limitation to binary relations. But I was 
talking about RDF reification, i.e., statements about triples, as the note in 
the url mentions: http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/#RDFReification.     (02)

Thanks,
Leo    (03)

-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Brunnbauer
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 3:21 AM
To: [ontolog-forum] 
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] URIs [was: Truth]    (04)


Hello Leo,    (05)

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:27:37PM +0000, Obrst, Leo J. wrote:
> [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.
> I refer to: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#Reif:
> "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. ..."    (06)

I am not sure if Kingsley is talking about triple reification but Dougs
DougFsGuttenbergBorrowing example was property reification (introducing a
class for the relation) instead of triple reification. Dougs example is the 
standard way to express n-ary relations with triples:    (07)

http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/    (08)

This document states "The task force plans to produce a suggested vocabulary 
for describing that a class represents an n-ary relation and for defining 
mappings between n-ary relations in RDF and OWL and other languages. A note 
on this vocabulary is forthcoming.". I wonder what became out of those plans.    (09)

BTW: If the n-ary relation behind a property reification can be simplified 
into a binary relation (e.G. DougF borrowed GuttenbergBibleCopy3), you can 
make use of this vocabulary:     (010)

 http://www.w3.org/wiki/PropertyReificationVocabulary    (011)

Regards,    (012)

Michael Brunnbauer    (013)

-- 
++  Michael Brunnbauer
++  netEstate GmbH
++  Geisenhausener Straße 11a
++  81379 München
++  Tel +49 89 32 19 77 80
++  Fax +49 89 32 19 77 89 
++  E-Mail brunni@xxxxxxxxxxxx
++  http://www.netestate.de/
++
++  Sitz: München, HRB Nr.142452 (Handelsregister B München)
++  USt-IdNr. DE221033342
++  Geschäftsführer: Michael Brunnbauer, Franz Brunnbauer
++  Prokurist: Dipl. Kfm. (Univ.) Markus Hendel    (014)

_________________________________________________________________
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    (015)


_________________________________________________________________
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    (016)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>