- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:32:26 +0100
- To: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Trying to figure out what kinds of test cases might even record
decisions about graph concepts.
Here's an experiment, below.
Dan
1. For each $X from 'g-box', 'g-snap', 'g-text' ):
Can this whatever-it-is RDF graphy-thing,
<http://example.org/1> <http://example.org:80/2> "A" .
...ever be considered the self-same $X as
<http://example.org/1:80> <http://example.org/2> "A" .
(ie. one thing not two)
Expanded version:
Q: 1a) - Can <http://example.org/1> <http://example.org:80/2> "A" . be the
same g-box as <http://example.org/1:80> <http://example.org/2> "A" . ?
... q might not make sense.
Or "from the same g-box"?
A: Sure.
Q: 1b) - Can <http://example.org/1> <http://example.org:80/2> "A" . be the
same g-snap as <http://example.org:80/1> <http://example.org:80/2> "A" . ?
A: No. They are different g-snaps because the RDF content does not
compare equal
because they have different URI strings labelling different nodes (even if
they always co-refer).
Q: 1c) - Can <http://example.org/1> <http://example.org:80/2> "A" . be the
same g-text as <http://example.org:80/1> <http://example.org/2> "A" . ?
A: No. Considered textually, they have different forms, checksums, etc.
Q: 2. Can <http://example.org/1> <http://example.org/2> "A" . ever NOT be the
same g-snap as <http://example.org/1> <http://example.org/2> "A" . ?
A: Sure. Maybe. Don't know. This is an example test case we might debate.
Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2011 16:33:05 UTC