W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2005

Re: subgraph/entailment

From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 15:05:21 +0100
To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20050907140521.GD23121@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk>

On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 09:49:13 -0400, Bijan Parsia wrote:
> If 3Store (with RDFS inferences always on) is a non-compliant system, I 
> think Steve would complain :) I'm not clear that it is, but I'm not 
> clear that it isn't given the current spec wording.

My impression from reading the spec was thats its fine (the inferred
triples will go in "union" graphs). It could be much clearer, but I think
its right that it doesnt impose a particular method for representing
inferred triples, as theres no clear consensus on what the right interface
is.

the SPARQL QL doc could me clearer on if/how its legitimate though.

- Steve
Received on Wednesday, 7 September 2005 14:05:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:24 GMT