W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > August 2012

Re: Minimal dataset semantics

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 14:03:06 +0200
Cc: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
Message-Id: <9A296BE8-9E84-4656-B6C9-C449682D0E2D@w3.org>
To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>

On Aug 24, 2012, at 13:34 , Richard Cyganiak wrote:

> On 24 Aug 2012, at 11:57, Ivan Herman wrote:
>> A possible compromise would be to have an entailment regime selected for the default graph and another one selected for all named graphs. That would make things simpler; it is certainly a simplification of Antoine's current scheme.
> 
> What do you mean by "selecting"? Do you mean there should be RDF triples somewhere that state what semantics is in effect in the default graph and in all named graphs?

That is what Antoine's scheme does, yes. See for his latest attempt at:

http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/Dataset-semantics-2.0

> 
> I'm not quite sure what the purpose would be. "Selecting entailment regimes" makes sense for the configuration of a reasoner or of a query engine. I don't understand why one would want to have that in the RDF Semantics spec.
> 

I do not think that particular aspect was discussed and I agree this is not part of the semantics spec. But the vocabulary used for such a setup, ie,:

http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/Dataset-semantics-2.0#Extensions

is probably better be defined and settled and published by the group.

Ivan



> Best,
> Richard
> 


----
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
Received on Friday, 24 August 2012 12:03:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:06 UTC