- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 13:55:24 -0500
- To: Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@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]? No, it has no opinion. It would give the same meaning to a graph with a repeated triple as it would to the one with the repetition removed. I would vote for bags on the grounds that they are harmless and put less of a burden on implementors, but that's me talking, not the MT. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Friday, 5 October 2001 14:55:25 UTC