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

RE: NP completeness & rdf entailment, graph identity, MT etc.

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 14:42:55 +0100
To: "Aaron Swartz" <aswartz@upclink.com>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDEEELCCAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

Aaron:
> Oh dear, I sure hope my RDF parser doesn't start returning
> _that_ any time soon. We've built something of a layered
> architecture in RDF, and I want to keep it that way. I see no
> reason an RDF parser should have to believe in the RDF Model
> Theory. Instead, it should just spit out triples for a
> higher-level application to deal with. It should definitely not
> be allowed to start adding or deleting triples (unless
> specifically asked to by the application.
>

I find this paragraph more convincing now than I did last week.

It suggests that rather than the conventional concrete versus abstract
syntax distinction, we have a rather richer set of layers:


   Semantics:                  Model Theory
   Second Level Abstraction:   Graph
   First Level Abstraction:    Triples (Multiset)
   Concrete Syntax:            RDF/XML & N-Triple


I guess last week I was assuming that the first level abstraction was not
useful.

Jeremy
Received on Monday, 8 October 2001 09:43:15 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:40:58 EDT