W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2004

Re: "entails" clearer than "subgraph" in defn Graph Pattern Match

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 16:33:16 +0000
Message-ID: <41A214CC.90702@hp.com>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
CC: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>



Dan Connolly wrote:
> I'm going over the definitions, and in the case of...
> 
> "Graph Pattern GP matches RDF graph G with substitution S if S(GP) is a
> subgraph of G."
> 
> I think entails is clearer:
> 
> "Graph Pattern GP matches RDF graph G with substitution S if G
> simply entails S(GP)."

OK - done v1.139

	Andy

> 
> with simply entails linked to
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#defentail
> 
> 
> p.s. a public comment asked
> "which definition of subgraph does SPARQL use - the standard one from
> graph
> theory or the expansive one used in RDF semantics in the presence of bnode
> relabelling?"
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2004Oct/0003.html
> 
> it's the one with relabelling. So subgraph is perhaps misleading.
> 
Received on Monday, 22 November 2004 16:34:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:21 GMT