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

Re: agenda, 12 Sept, 14:30 UTC

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 18:48:01 +0100
Message-ID: <4506F2D1.6060703@hp.com>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
CC: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>, dawg mailing list <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>

Bijan Parsia wrote:
> On Sep 12, 2006, at 3:09 PM, Seaborne, Andy wrote:
>> Hopefully a report will speed the telecon up (sorry - it's a bit  
>> rushed)
>>> 5. formsOfDistinct
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006JulSep/ 
>>> 0200.html
>>> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#formsOfDistinct
>> HP position:
>> Two different solutions in a DISTINCT result set differ by one or  
>> more bindings.  One binding is different from another if they refer  
>> to different variables or the values are RDFterm-different.   
>> DISTINCT is term-DISTINCT as defined for SPARQL (simple entailment).
> [snip]
> Just to be clear, HP doesn't require graph leaning then? So it is  
> pairwise distinctness with answerset scoped bnodes.

That isn't leaning the underlying graph being queried is it?  To be lcear 
there: HP does not want eaning the underlying graph as a condition for SPARQL 
and wants redundancy in the queried graph to be exposed.  See also around this 
Services may choose to offer a lean graph if they so wish.

But I'm guessing you mean leaning your graph definition of the graph of the 
result set (and not the graph form used by the DAWG test cases).  I phrased it 
in non-graph language so as not have a dependency on either of those graph 
definitions, nor leaning of such graphs.  I think that the same as says "not 
leaning" but I'm not fully aware of all the consequences and cases that arise 
when leaning a graph formed from a result set.

(I suggest avoiding the term 'answerset' where possible because of the 
confusion with answerset programming).


> Cheers,
> Bijan.
Received on Tuesday, 12 September 2006 17:48:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:51 UTC