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: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 10:52:00 -0500
Message-Id: <44E20158-4543-11D9-B5C9-000D9338C596@w3.org>
Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
To: andy.seaborne@hp.com

On Dec 3, 2004, at 9:55 AM, Seaborne, Andy wrote:
[...]
> RDF concepts mentions subgraphs.
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/#graphdefs

yes, that'll work. What didn't work was "subgraph" without
a (link to) a clear definition.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Received on Friday, 3 December 2004 15:51:57 GMT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: jos.deroo@agfa.com: "Re: Fwd: SPARQL: graph syntax should be N3 subset"
Previous message: Seaborne, Andy: "Re: feedback on "SPARQL Query Language for RDF", v1.139"
In reply to: Seaborne, Andy: "Re: "entails" clearer than "subgraph" in defn Graph Pattern Match"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
Help: [ How to use the archives ] [ Search in the archives ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 1 October 2009 14:42:00 GMT