Re: Labelled graphs

On Apr 25, 2012, at 05:16 , Sandro Hawke wrote:

> On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 16:05 +0100, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> 
>> On 24/04/12 13:04, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>> (mostly agreement, a few details)
>>> 
>>> On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 12:03 +0100, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On 17/04/12 16:59, Guus Schreiber wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> 
>>>>> An attempt at formulating a possible conclusion/consensus from this thread:
>>>>> 
>>>>> * Non-typed labels are simply associations, no special semantics
>>> 
>>> There are some semantics, though: the label IRI (or blank node) denotes
>>> something (maybe call it a "labeling object"), and that something is
>>> associated with the graph.
>> 
>> Given the "something" indirection, whether that counts as "semantics" or 
>> not is a bit moot to me.  It's "no fixed semantics".
> 
> Here's the part that's important to me:
> 
>        Under OWL entailment and our dataset semantics, does
>           { <u1> owl:sameAs <u2> }
>           <u1> { <a> <b> <c> }
>        entail
>           <u2> { <a> <b> <c> }
>        ?
> 

FWIW, in the case of http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Graphs_Design_6.1/Sem the answer is clearly yes.

Ivan

----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf