%0 Conference Paper %1 Lopes_rdfneeds %A Lopes, Nuno %A Zimmermann, Antoine %A Hogan, Aidan %A Lukácsy, Gergely %A Polleres, Axel %A Straccia, Umberto %A Decker, Stefan %B in Proceedings of the W3C Workshop - RDF Next Steps %D 2010 %K quadruple rdf reification triple %P 26--27 %T RDF Needs Annotations %U http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.352.5643 %X While the current mechanism of reification in RDF is without semantics and widely considered inappropriate and cumbersome, some form of reification – speaking about triples themselves – is needed in RDF for many reasonable applications: in particular, reification allows for enhancing triples with annotations relating to provenance, spatio-temporal validity, degrees of trust, fuzzy values and/or other contextual information. In this position paper, we argue that – besides resolving the issue of how to syntactically represent reification in the future (i.e., whether to stick with the current reification mechanism or standardise a different mechanism such as Named Graphs) – it is time to agree on certain core annotations that are widely needed. We summarise existing work and provide a possible direction towards handling reification by means of a general annotation framework that can be instantiated for those major use cases we currently see arising. 1 A Need for RDF Annotations In this paper, we motivate and discuss the syntactic representation and semantic interpretation of generic RDF annotations. In particular, we propose the introduction ofagenericsemanticframeworktorepresent annotations in RDF. Although these annotations can be used to representarbitrarydomains,wesuggesta

@inproceedings{Lopes_rdfneeds, abstract = {While the current mechanism of reification in RDF is without semantics and widely considered inappropriate and cumbersome, some form of reification – speaking about triples themselves – is needed in RDF for many reasonable applications: in particular, reification allows for enhancing triples with annotations relating to provenance, spatio-temporal validity, degrees of trust, fuzzy values and/or other contextual information. In this position paper, we argue that – besides resolving the issue of how to syntactically represent reification in the future (i.e., whether to stick with the current reification mechanism or standardise a different mechanism such as Named Graphs) – it is time to agree on certain core annotations that are widely needed. We summarise existing work and provide a possible direction towards handling reification by means of a general annotation framework that can be instantiated for those major use cases we currently see arising. 1 A Need for RDF Annotations In this paper, we motivate and discuss the syntactic representation and semantic interpretation of generic RDF annotations. In particular, we propose the introduction ofagenericsemanticframeworktorepresent annotations in RDF. Although these annotations can be used to representarbitrarydomains,wesuggesta}, added-at = {2015-10-25T15:00:16.000+0100}, author = {Lopes, Nuno and Zimmermann, Antoine and Hogan, Aidan and Lukácsy, Gergely and Polleres, Axel and Straccia, Umberto and Decker, Stefan}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/279d746e4519b57cc12976801bd9be8ed/polythetic}, booktitle = {in Proceedings of the W3C Workshop - RDF Next Steps}, description = {CiteSeerX — RDF Needs Annotations}, interhash = {ace84e5823661fbb61ac402c63a6d3d6}, intrahash = {79d746e4519b57cc12976801bd9be8ed}, keywords = {quadruple rdf reification triple}, pages = {26--27}, timestamp = {2015-10-25T15:00:16.000+0100}, title = {RDF Needs Annotations}, url = {http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.352.5643}, year = 2010 }