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

Re: proposal: "box datasets" (sandro's dataset spec, v0.1)

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2013 15:47:41 -0400
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
CC: RDF-WG Group <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <e0ad9a2c-c3d2-4ecf-a4bf-9e11c7173bec@email.android.com>


Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:
>" Even though "1.0"^^xs:double "1.00"^^xs:double denote the same thing,
>they are not the same RDF term, so the triple { :a :b 1.0 } is not the
>same
>triple as { :a :b 1.00 }.  Since they are not the same triple, the
>datasets
>which say they are each what is contained by :g1 cannot both be true.
>(See "Literal Term Equality" in RDF 1.1 Concepts.)"
>
>Do you have a corresponding notion of exact graph matching that works
>with
>bnodes too? Is it needed?
>

It's not needed.   A bnode is the same term as itself and a different term than every other term.   I believe that's clear from RDF 1.1 Concepts.

>Does this intuitive 'contains' mean 'contains right now', 'contains
>last
>time I looked', or something else?

I talk about that a bit under dereference, but the basic answer is it's the same as everything else in RDF.   That is, formally it means for all time, but in practice it means for some contexts (eg some points in time) determined out-of-band.

Future work item for RDF is to understand that context stuff better.   In particular to understand how to get from here to there practically.   ISWC workshop maybe?

    - Sandro
-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Received on Sunday, 15 September 2013 19:47:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:16 UTC