Re: Higher-arity to RDF binary

2010年5月19日 Chris Dollin <chris.dollin@epimorphics.com>
> On Wednesday 19 May 2010 01:39:52 pm Jitao Yang wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > In reference to http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/,
> > suppose we define:
> > "... the formula DescPr(*d, p, o*) , asserting that object o is a value
> of
> > property p in description *d*. ..."
> >
> > and we have:
> > DescPr(*d, p, o*)
> > DescPr(*d', p, o'*)
> >
> > the above formula could be represented by RDF like:
> >
> > :d
> > a :DescPr_description ;
> > :has_property :p .
> >
> > :d'
> > a :DescPr_description ;
> > :has_property :p .
> >
> > :p
> > a :DescPr_property ;
> > :has_value :o ;
> > :has_value :o' .
> >
> > >From these triples how can we go back in a unique way to the logical
> > representation.
>
> I don't think you can, and I think that's because it's not a good
> representation (and vice-versa).
>
> I wasn't sure which bit of http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/
> you were comparing/contrasting to.
>
I reference to case1 and case3 together from
http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/,
what is your idea of representing the formula using RDF?
So that the triples can go back to the logical representation?
Thanks,
Jitao
> --
> RDF is not /the/ answer. RDF is /an/ answer. -
> Arcadian
>
> Epimorphics Ltd
> Registered address: C/O Robson Taylor, Froomsgate House, Bristol
> Registered number: 7016688
>
>