W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > March 2008

Re: ACTION-420 Review of SW-compatibility

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:14:19 +0000
Message-Id: <F16E9F93-F509-4B6E-A469-F1C1B51C3D3C@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>, RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
To: axel@polleres.net

On 10 Mar 2008, at 20:05, Axel Polleres wrote:
> SPARQL only allows this for graph patterns AFAIR, not for example  
> for constructed triples in the CONSTRUCT parts.

That doesn't seem relevant. The point is that SPARQL can query semi- 
generalized graphs *and* that particular form of generalization is  
already "in the air".

I'm not advocating anything, merely pointing out some connections. Of  
course, sparql also has query variables in predicate position...which  
isn't too far from bnodes in predicate positions.

> So, since triples in patterns having literals in subject positions  
> cannot match any triple in standard RDF graphs anyway, and the  
> semantics of COSNTRUCTs is compatible to standard RDF...  this  
> loosining of the original RDF restrictions in SPARQL is somewhat  
> redundant

It wouldn't be against 2

> ... and does not extend standard RDF. Here though, it seems we do  
> propose to extend standard RDF.

I think it pretty clearly does generalize standard RDF, albeit in an  
ineffectual way :) But whatev.

Received on Monday, 10 March 2008 20:12:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:49 UTC