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

Re: [Fwd: Comments on SPARQL] (entailment, soundness, completeness)

From: Enrico Franconi <franconi@inf.unibz.it>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 15:00:29 +0200
Message-Id: <7128C485-BBD4-4F59-81D4-A92E3745E3AB@inf.unibz.it>
Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>


On 20 Sep 2005, at 14:55, Bijan Parsia wrote:
> Since the two major alternative approaches as I understand them  
> "virtual graphs" vs. entailment bases are, at least in some forms,  
> *equivalent* (I'm not clear pat means them to be anymore!) then the  
> whole first section of that email is motivate by spec clarity  
> issues. So, the use case *from my perspective* is producing  
> interoperable implementations for a variety of semantics imposed on  
> the source documents. For example, I may want to query the syntax  
> of an RDF document (i.e., with full asserted redundancy) for an  
> editor applicaiton, or I may want just the non-redundant  
> information in the graph (e.g., I don't want to have to post query  
> filter out that someone loving someone since mary loving john was  
> already in there).

I agree with  Bijan's comment.
--e.
Received on Tuesday, 20 September 2005 13:01:05 GMT

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