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

Re: tests and inference?

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:09:19 -0500
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: "Thompson, Bryan B." <BRYAN.B.THOMPSON@saic.com>, andy.seaborne@hp.com, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>, "Bebee, Bradley R." <BRADLEY.R.BEBEE@saic.com>
Message-ID: <20041216150919.GA27225@monkeyfist.com>

On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 09:02:13AM -0600, Dan Connolly wrote:

> How about adding...
> 
>   "The dataset gives the exact graph against which the query is
>   evaluated (no further inference is used to determine the
>   input graph)."

Better: "The dataset gives the precise graph against which the query
is to be evaluated: inference must not be used to determine or modify
the input graph."

> The SPARQL QL spec is already explict enough, to me, but Kendall
> if you can think of a way to make it more explicit, very well,
> but keep in mind that the QL is sorta orthogonal to inference.

Uh, yes, I know that it's "sorta orthogonal"; or, well, I think that
it is orthogonal.

My point about the Sparql spec is that it doesn't help a person who
wants to figure out why all of her tests are failing because her
triple store defaultedly does RDFS inference (say) on all graphs. In
fact, if there's nothing in the test suite about this issue, and a
person goes and looks at the Sparql spec, the language about
orthogonality of inference and query misleads *further*.

So, I'm not suggesting any changes in this regard to the Sparql spec
itself.

Hope that's clearer.

Kendall
Received on Thursday, 16 December 2004 15:10:57 GMT

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