To clarify (or obfuscate), The term "named graph", as used in RDF, is defined in section 4 of the RDF 1.1 Concepts and Abstract Syntax Recommendation <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-dataset>.
Each named graph is a pair consisting of an IRI <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-iri> or a blank node (the graph name), and an RDF graph <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-rdf-graph> . [...] NOTE Despite the use of the word “name” in “named graph <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-named-graph>”, the graph name <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-graph-name> is not required to denote <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-denote> the graph. It is merely syntactically paired with the graph. RDF does not place any formal restrictions on what resource <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-resource> the graph name may denote, nor on the relationship between that resource and the graph. A discussion of different RDF dataset semantics can be found in [ RDF11-DATASETS <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#bib-RDF11-DATASETS>]. I have no problems with having an entity that made of one part that is a Propositional Object, and another part that is an IRI. The obvious identity criteria for such an entity would include both components - two "named graph"s with different IRI parts would be distinct. ( I also have no problem with the Cyc mereological approach to the relationship between conceptual works and information bearing objects, so my judgement is suspect). Simon On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:13 PM, martin <mar...@ics.forth.gr> wrote: > Dear Simon, > > I am not sure if I understand your argument. Any informartion object might > quite well have a name. > In particular it has an identity as a unit, and being a unit is not equal > to any of its propositions. This is probably > the same as modelling the Named Graphs as tuples (name, set). > > I'd however question your statement: > "Named graphs are not graphs that are named; they are a tuple..." I'd say, > they are graphs that are named > in the framework of RDF encoding using a particular syntax. They can be > modelled mathematically as tuples...." > A tuple (name, set) is equally meaningless out of the context to which > such a model refers to. It could be > anything you would like to use it for. That's maths. Isn't it? > > In other words, yes, an information object has not only content. It has a > unity, an identity, and even a provenance. > > The question is, if two information objects are identical if the contain > the same set of symbols or propositions > but have different provenance. This is particularly a problem with very > small information objects. > > Best, > > Martin > > > > > > On 24/7/2014 7:57 πμ, Simon Spero wrote: > > The AAT might work. > I'm not entirely sure that named graphs are propositional objects as > defined in the CRM, but I think the definition is loose enough. > > Named graphs are not graphs that are named; they are a tuple of an IRI > (which is a name), and graph (which is the set of propositions). If the > name is a proposition, it is not one in the graph it is associated with. > > If Propositional objects can include parts which are not propositions then > there is no problem- though it would seem more natural to have information > objects only part of which are propositional. > That would be a bit too big a change this far down the road ; if named > graphs can't fit directly, graphs themselves would; these could be part of > named graphs. > On Jul 24, 2014 12:15 AM, "Stephen Stead" <ste...@paveprime.com> wrote: > >> Can you think of a named graph that would be sufficiently iconic to make a >> good example? >> Rgds >> SdS >> >> Stephen Stead >> Tel +44 20 8668 3075 <%2B44%2020%208668%203075> >> Mob +44 7802 755 013 <%2B44%207802%20755%20013> >> E-mail ste...@paveprime.com >> LinkedIn Profile http://uk.linkedin.com/in/steads >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Crm-sig [mailto:crm-sig-boun...@ics.forth.gr] On Behalf Of Øyvind >> Eide >> Sent: 23 July 2014 15:12 >> To: crm-sig >> Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] *** ISSUE *** Revision of scope note for E73 >> Information Object to specifically include named graphs >> >> Dear Steve, >> >> This sounds good to me. Do you think an example of a named graph should be >> added as well? >> >> Best, >> >> Øyvind >> >> On 18. juli 2014, at 08:44, Stephen Stead wrote: >> >> > Dear CRM-SIG >> > I would like to suggest the following revision to the scope note for E73 >> Information Object. Its intention is to specifically mention “named >> graphs” >> as being instances of E73 Information Object. As we look at implementation >> of the CRM it is becoming increasingly obvious that “named graphs” are >> going >> to be a particularly useful tool, it would therefore seem handy if we >> explicitly mentioned that they live in E73! >> > Best regards >> > SdS >> > >> > >> > Current Scope Note >> > E73 Information Object >> > Subclass of: E89 Propositional Object >> > E90 Symbolic Object >> > Superclass of: E29 Design or Procedure >> > E31 Document >> > E33 Linguistic Object >> > E36 Visual Item >> > >> > Scope note: This class comprises identifiable immaterial items, >> such as a poems, jokes, data sets, images, texts, multimedia objects, >> procedural prescriptions, computer program code, algorithm or mathematical >> formulae, that have an objectively recognizable structure and are >> documented >> as single units. >> > >> > An E73 Information Object does not depend on a specific physical >> carrier, >> which can include human memory, and it can exist on one or more carriers >> simultaneously. >> > Instances of E73 Information Object of a linguistic nature should be >> declared as instances of the E33 Linguistic Object subclass. Instances of >> E73 Information Object of a documentary nature should be declared as >> instances of the E31 Document subclass. Conceptual items such as types and >> classes are not instances of E73 Information Object, nor are ideas >> without a >> reproducible expression. >> > Examples: >> > § image BM000038850.JPG from the Clayton Herbarium in London § E. A. >> > Poe's "The Raven" >> > § the movie "The Seven Samurai" by Akira Kurosawa § the Maxwell >> > Equations >> > Properties: >> > >> > Revised Scope Note >> > >> > E73 Information Object >> > Subclass of: E89 Propositional Object >> > E90 Symbolic Object >> > Superclass of: E29 Design or Procedure >> > E31 Document >> > E33 Linguistic Object >> > E36 Visual Item >> > >> > Scope note: This class comprises identifiable immaterial items, >> such as a poems, jokes, data sets, images, texts, multimedia objects, >> procedural prescriptions, computer program code, algorithm or mathematical >> formulae, that have an objectively recognizable structure and are >> documented >> as single units. The encoding structure known as a “named graph” also >> falls >> under this class, so that each “named graph” is an instance of an E73 >> Information Object. >> > >> > An E73 Information Object does not depend on a specific physical >> carrier, >> which can include human memory, and it can exist on one or more carriers >> simultaneously. >> > Instances of E73 Information Object of a linguistic nature should be >> declared as instances of the E33 Linguistic Object subclass. Instances of >> E73 Information Object of a documentary nature should be declared as >> instances of the E31 Document subclass. Conceptual items such as types and >> classes are not instances of E73 Information Object, nor are ideas >> without a >> reproducible expression. >> > Examples: >> > § image BM000038850.JPG from the Clayton Herbarium in London § E. A. >> > Poe's "The Raven" >> > § the movie "The Seven Samurai" by Akira Kurosawa § the Maxwell >> > Equations >> > Properties: >> > >> > >> > Stephen Stead >> > Director >> > Paveprime Ltd >> > 35 Downs Court Rd >> > Purley, Surrey >> > UK, CR8 1BF >> > Tel +44 20 8668 3075 >> > Fax +44 20 8763 1739 >> > Mob +44 7802 755 013 >> > E-mail ste...@paveprime.com >> > LinkedIn Profile http://uk.linkedin.com/in/steads >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Crm-sig mailing list >> > Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr >> > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Crm-sig mailing list >> Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr >> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Crm-sig mailing list >> Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr >> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Crm-sig mailing > listCrm-sig@ics.forth.grhttp://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig > > > > -- > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Dr. Martin Doerr | Vox:+30(2810)391625 | > Research Director | Fax:+30(2810)391638 | > | Email: mar...@ics.forth.gr | > | > Center for Cultural Informatics | > Information Systems Laboratory | > Institute of Computer Science | > Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH) | > | > N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton, | > GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece | > | > Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl | > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > _______________________________________________ > Crm-sig mailing list > Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig > >
