W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: Wording change (was : Re: Final text for Basic Graph Patterns)

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:53:07 +0000
Message-ID: <43D0CF23.9070704@hp.com>
To: Enrico Franconi <franconi@inf.unibz.it>
CC: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>

Enrico Franconi wrote:
> On 20 Jan 2006, at 00:23, Enrico Franconi wrote:
>> My final proposal: we use our idea with orderedmerge (which has  
>> already been massaged in a nice text in <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/ 
>> DataAccess/rq23>, that still contains few minor imprecisions I'll  
>> point out in another mail), and immediately after Andy will provide  
>> the explanation of it by showing how it would be equivalent to the  
>> union and a more restricted scoping graph, exactly in the way he  
>> says that it is equivalent to subgraph matching.
> Andy:
> Definition:  Scoping Graph
> Delete: ", with respect to scoping set B," and "and uses terms from  
> scoping set B".
> "The scoping graph uses those terms to give a graph that is  
> equivalent to the graph to be matched." ==> "The scoping graph makes  
> the graph to be matched independent on the chosen bnode names."

Corrections noted and applied.
> Definition:  Basic Graph Pattern
> Add: "* For simple entailment, the scoping set B includes only the  
> RDF terms in G'"

Added after the definition because the definition is general and not 
restricted to simple entailment.

We can have a special definition that is BGP under simple entailment if you want.

> cheers
> --e.

Received on Friday, 20 January 2006 11:54:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:50 UTC