- From: James Anderson <anderson.james.1955@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2024 10:46:22 -0400
- To: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- Cc: RDF-star Working Group <public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org>
good afternoon; > On 12. Jul 2024, at 10:02, Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 3:49 PM Souripriya Das > <souripriya.das@oracle.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Thomas, >> >>> The technical argument is: it would be non-monotonic if you could annotate a triple with the remark that it is not asserted. >> >> I'd say that that "not asserted" in the "remark" is only interpreted in the context of the ___domain or application that the data creator is modelling ... it has nothing to do with RDF's notion of assertion of a triple. > > I agree. Just like it is up to the application how to treat e.g. an > assertion of `<x> :isMarriedTo <y>` in conjunction with `<x> > :isDivorcedWith <y>`. Some things cannot be true at once, but the core > of RDF does not come with the power to model that. That belongs to the > level of formal reasoning upon it (and/or pattern matching techniques > to detect it). there is a necessary distinction between "model" and "reason about" which this claim drops on the floor. --- james anderson | james@dydra.com | https://dydra.com
Received on Friday, 12 July 2024 14:46:42 UTC