Aaron Swartz wrote: > > Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote: > > > { [ is log:resolvesTo of <rdfc25May.n3> ] log:includes > > [ is log:resolvesTo of <,xx.n3> ] } log:implies { :test1 a :Success > > }. > > Isn't the requirement here a bit more stringent? log:includes, at least from > the name, implies a sort of subClass semantics -- that one includes the > triples of the other, but may include other triples. Shouldn't we insure > that a processor _only_ generates the correct triples and nothing more? Yes, we should test for X includes Y and Y includes X. > Or > am I misunderstanding log:includes? -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/Received on Thursday, 31 May 2001 21:52:08 EDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:35:55 EDT