W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > August 2013

Comment on rdf concepts

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 18:29:21 +0200
Cc: W3C RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <A8D6328C-0973-4DD8-8976-7778FB99E021@w3.org>
To: David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>
I have a question/comment on this:

[[
4.1 RDF Dataset Comparison

Two RDF datasets (the RDF dataset D1 with default graph DG1 and named graph NG1 and the RDF dataset D2 with default graph DG2 and named graph NG2) are dataset-isomorphic if and only if:

	 DG1 and DG2 are graph-isomorphic;
	 For each (n1,g1) in NG1, there exists (n2,g2) in NG2 such that n1=n2 and g1 and g2 are graph-isomorphic;
	 For each (n2,g2) in NG2, there exists (n1,g1) in NG1 such that n1=n2 and g1 and g2 are graph-isomorphic.

]]

A graph name can now be a blank node. Wouldn't it be appropriate to use the 'M' mapping of section 3.6 for the graph names, too? Or are we deliberately silent on this?

Ivan


----
Ivan Herman, W3C 
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Monday, 5 August 2013 16:29:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 5 August 2013 16:29:54 UTC