Hi all
Quickly browsing this thread, seems to me that the Property Reification
Vocabulary [1] provides exactly what is needed without going through the
burden of explicit reification or named graphs, and I did not see it
mentioned unless I missed something.
It would be cool if this vocabulary
Hi Kingsley,
On October 15, 2014 at 2:59 PM Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
On 10/15/14 8:36 AM, Frans Knibbe | Geodan wrote:
On 2014-10-13 14:14, John Walker wrote:
Hi Frans,
See this example:
Hi,
On 15 Oct 2014, at 23:02, John Walker john.wal...@semaku.com wrote:
Hi
On October 15, 2014 at 2:59 PM Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com
wrote:
On 10/15/14 8:36 AM, Frans Knibbe | Geodan wrote:
...
Personally I would not use this approach for foaf:age and foaf:based_near as
Hi Hugh,
On October 16, 2014 at 12:45 PM Hugh Glaser h...@glasers.org wrote:
Hi,
On 15 Oct 2014, at 23:02, John Walker john.wal...@semaku.com wrote:
Hi
On October 15, 2014 at 2:59 PM Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com
wrote:
On 10/15/14 8:36 AM, Frans Knibbe | Geodan
On 10/16/14 8:00 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 10/16/14 3:33 AM, John Walker wrote:
Hi Kingsley,
On October 15, 2014 at 2:59 PM Kingsley Idehen
kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
On 10/15/14 8:36 AM, Frans Knibbe | Geodan wrote:
On 2014-10-13 14:14, John Walker wrote:
Hi Frans,
See this
On 2014-10-14 19:24, Carsten Keßler wrote:
Dear all,
here’s another paper that discusses different
approaches: http://carsten.io/trame-kessler-kuhn-cosit2013.pdf
Thank you! Yes, that paper is also a good read. Now my head is spinning
even more :-)
If I may try to summarize, it is saying
On 2014-10-15 14:59, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
[snip]
Frans,
How about reified RDF statements?
I think discounting RDF reification vocabulary is yet another act of
premature optimization, in regards to the Semantic Web meme :)
Well, reification is mentioned in most of the texts that I have found
If I may try to summarize, it is saying that neither reification
Not exactly, please note the difference between RDF reification and
conceptual reification. IMHO, the last mentioned is the way to go.
Best,
Krzysztof
On 10/16/2014 08:15 AM, Frans Knibbe | Geodan wrote:
On 2014-10-14 19:24,
On 10/16/14 11:15 AM, Frans Knibbe | Geodan wrote:
On 2014-10-14 19:24, Carsten Keßler wrote:
Dear all,
here’s another paper that discusses different approaches:
http://carsten.io/trame-kessler-kuhn-cosit2013.pdf
Thank you! Yes, that paper is also a good read. Now my head is
spinning even
On 10/16/14 12:02 PM, Frans Knibbe | Geodan wrote:
On 2014-10-15 14:59, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
[snip]
Frans,
How about reified RDF statements?
I think discounting RDF reification vocabulary is yet another act of
premature optimization, in regards to the Semantic Web meme :)
Well, reification
On 2014-10-16 12:45, Hugh Glaser wrote:
Personally I would not use this approach for foaf:age and foaf:based_near as
these capture a certain snapshot/state of (the information about) a resource.
Having some representation where the foaf:age triple could be entailed could
lead to having
On Thu, 10/16/14, Frans Knibbe | Geodan frans.kni...@geodan.nl wrote:
... the current state of a resource might be part of the default graph (which
can remain unnamed) and historical states associated with temporal graphs.
You see this in the wild
Yes, this is something that we do with the CIDOC CRM ontology. Biographical
records are a major part of cultural heritage and humanities work (e.g. museum
biographical records, prosopography, etc) and therefore this is perhaps more
developed than more general ontologies. CIDOC CRM is event
Kingsley, greetings.
It is important to keep a clear distinction between what temporal DB calls
valid time and transaction time. T-time is when the record was inserted into
the databese or when it was created. This is important, basically, for internal
accounting and maintenance of the DB
14 matches
Mail list logo
