W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > October 2001

Re: graphs are sets?! (was: rdfms-difference-between-ID-and-about (was: Issues list update/status?))

From: Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 08:18:41 -0400
To: phayes@ai.uwf.edu, aswartz@upclink.com
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20011005081841.A18847@w3.org>
On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 05:05:26PM +0100, Jan Grant wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Aaron Swartz wrote:
> 
> > On Thursday, October 4, 2001, at 09:34  AM, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> >
> > > I would prefer test1.nt to only have one line if they are
> > > identical. The
> > > graph is a set.
> > > A comment explaining the deletion would then be helpful.
> >
> > Whoa, whoa, whoa, I don't think we ever agreed to this. It was
> > my understanding the output was a bag (there wasn't harm in
> > doing so), but could be interpreted as a set.
> >
> > When was this changed?

I also do not recall an explicit decision on this.

The issue for this is:

 [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-identity-of-statements

and it is under the category Issues Awaiting Consideration.

> The MT would give the same interpretation for equivalent arcs in a
> multigraph, wouldn't it?

Pat - does the MT address [1]?
~
Received on Friday, 5 October 2001 08:18:42 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:40:56 EDT