Thanks Denny, Yes, I understand that o:Fact is an inaccurate name. I have been trying to think of an alternative to Statement (assertion, claim, declaration etc.) but can't think of anything better than Statement :)
It should be very clear that it is different to rdf:Statement with time. nick. On 04/02/2013 13:03, "Denny Vrandečić" <[email protected]> wrote: >We are reluctant, but open, to renaming it. But not to "Fact". Statement >has the nice ambiguous quality regarding its correctness which Fact lacks. > > >On the other hand, the similarity to rdf:Statement is not merely >syntactic, so I do not see too much of an issue here. > > > >2013/2/1 Nicholas Humfrey <[email protected]> > >Hello, > >My colleague Yves Raimond and myself were just having a quick chat about >the Wikidata RDF serialisation plans. > >http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Development/RDF > > >While the reification makes sense, we thought that it looked a bit too >much like rdf:Statement. > >w:Berlin s:Population Berlin:Statement1 . > >Berlin:Statement1 rdf:type o:Statement . > > > >Perhaps you could rename o:Statement to o:Fact instead? > > >nick. ----------------------------- http://www.bbc.co.uk This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. ----------------------------- _______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
