W3C SW Dev

An RDF Model for GET/PUT and Document Management

Assertion by reference

cfAssertion of another documentin thesemantic web toolbox.

In the general case, a reference to a term from another document in the Web does not imply all the assertions made in that document; for example, one document might refer to another for the purpose of refuting it. But for the case that we do want to assert the contents of another document, we have:

The shoe uses-ontology relation[@@link] is a subProperty of basis, for example.

To define basis, consider the rule "if r2 is a basis for r1, and r2 says s, then r1 says s". That's a reasonable rule, assuming the Web is static, i.e. that if some document ever makes a claim, it always makes that claim. But it does not allow us to model a page about a group that says who the membership of the group is, where the membership can change from time to time.

So rather than "r1 says s" we use "m1 says s" where m1 is a particular message that exposes the content of r1 -- an HTTP reply, for example:

consequent(a1, s)

This rule is written in terms of a model for communications protocols.

Communication Protocol Semantics

cf notes on state; no longer trying to stick to Singular Nouns for Names

an interesting exception (found5Jan2001):

Any software licences or redistribution permissions, release status documentation, and the like you get via CVS are NOT INTENDED to have legal effect. Just because I check a document into CVS does not mean that I stand by its contents.

-- Legal notices, release status, etc in ijackson's stuff


frommeeting notes

from Jigsaw review 24 Aug 2000:


User agents following this specification should be aware that assertions made by HTML pages are not facts, but claims. I.e., if element x claims that element y is related with relation r to element z, then the user-agent should not be entering r(y,z) into its database (i.e., "Now I know that y is related to z with the relationship r!!"). Instead, it should be entering something along the lines of r(x,y,z) into its database (i.e., "x is claiming that y is related to z with relationship r."). This is an important distinction: it's perfectly fine for HTML pages out there to be making completely false claims; one shouldn't simply accept them as truth. For similar reasons, HTML pages can only make assertions, not retractions.

shoe spec

this is maintained in HTML; see static RDF, on-demand RDF, the transformation

Dan Connolly

$Revision: 1.17 $ of $Date: 2001/01/05 21:05:34 $ by $Author: connolly $