W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > March 2006

Re: [OK] Re: [OK?] Re: comments on "SPARQL Query Language for RDF" (Non-respect for RDF Semantics)

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 08:12:54 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20060307.081254.84708422.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: franconi@inf.unibz.it
Cc: eric@w3.org, connolly@w3.org, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org

From: Enrico Franconi <franconi@inf.unibz.it>
Subject: Re: [OK] Re: [OK?] Re: comments on "SPARQL Query Language for RDF" (Non-respect for RDF Semantics)
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 00:43:21 +0100

> On 7 Mar 2006, at 00:26, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> >>> (This also depends on just how the scoping graph is determined.)
> >>
> >> Mmhh, I'd say that it does not depend on that: the answer is uniquely
> >> determined up to bnode renaming. Why are you saying that?
> >
> > Well, changing the scoping graph can change the permissable  
> > answers, or at
> > least that is what I believe based on the SPARL documents.
> 
> The scoping graph is always isomorphic to the original dataset - the  
> only things that may change are the names of the bnodes. This has no  
> effect on the answer set, apart from having possibly different bnode  
> names.
> 
> --e.

Sorry, I meant scoping *set*.

peter
Received on Tuesday, 7 March 2006 13:13:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:50 GMT