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

Re: some options for issues#rdfSemantics

From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 11:20:28 +0100
To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20051018102028.GA23014@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk>

On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 01:51:49 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote:
>    I just updated the entry for rdfSemantics in the issues list. I'ts as
>    neutral as I can manage. Please try to prepare for straw polls on these 3
>    options tomorrow:
> 
>      some notes by DanC in preparation for 18 Oct telcon, based on 4 Oct
>      discussion:

Thanks, helpful summary.
 
>   +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>   |  proposal:   |     LC design     |  redundancy   |    parameterized     |
>   |              |                   |   optional    |      entailment      |
>   |--------------+-------------------+---------------+----------------------|
...
>   |              |                   |all service    |librdf, ARQ support   |
>   |              |                   |implementations|"abstract syntax"     |
>   |              |                   |of LC spec     |entailment; cwm       |
>   |              |several service    |(ARQ, librdf,  |supports rdf-simple   |
>   |              |implementations    |[what's        |entailment. I gather  |
>   |implementation|(ARQ, librdf,      |steveH's thing |steveH's system       |
>   |  experience  |[what's steveH's   |called?], ...) |supports RDFS         |
>   |              |thing called?],    |plus any       |entailment, or        |
>   |              |...)               |implementations|something close       |
>   |              |                   |that use lean  |(hmm... how does this |
>   |              |                   |graphs (e.g.   |interact with the     |
>   |              |                   |cwm)           |GRAPH stuff?)         |
>   |--------------+-------------------+---------------+----------------------|

For the record 3store places inferred triples in other graphs (currently
identified by bnodes, though that may change) with some triples saying
where it came from. eg.

:G1 { :b a rdfs:Class }          # a ground graph
_:ig1 { :b rdfs:subClassOf :b }  # an inferred graph
:SYSTEM { _:ig1 :dependsOn :G1 } # the system graph, holds provenance etc.

Inference is disabled if background graphs are used, I couldn't find any
way of making them sensibly coexist.

Consequenctly queries like
	CONSTRUCT { ?a ?b ?c }
	WHERE { GRAPH <http://example.com> { ?a ?b ?c } }
will not return any triples inferred by RDFS.

- Steve
Received on Tuesday, 18 October 2005 10:20:41 GMT

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