W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > September 2002

Re: Some excerpts from AdobeXMP SDK Documentation

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 14:00:18 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020926134941.02165128@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, "w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

At 15:10 26/09/2002 +0300, Patrick Stickler wrote:

[...]

> >
> > Oh, then my question must not have been clear.  You claim that XMP is
> > untidy.  I am asking whether there is an objective test whether an API is
> > tidy or not.
> >
> > That is a valid question, right?

Hmmm, you don't seem to have responded to this.

[...]

>I would say that Jena is fairly agnostic overall.

Yet that is not the result the test you described in:

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Sep/0300.html

would give.  I'm having a little trouble understanding what consistent test 
you are applying.

>  The single
>equality comparison method suggests a syntactic comparison,
>rather than a semantic comparision (which is understandable,
>given the generic nature of Jena) and the fact that equality
>is tested on the entire statement means that Jena has nothing
>to say about whether the following entailment holds or not:
>
>IF
>    Jenny age "10" .
>    Movie title "10" .
>THEN
>    Jenny age _:x .
>    Movie title _:x .

I suggested in:

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Sep/0284.html

  [[model.contains(c, d, a.getProperty(b).getObject())]]

was an accurate representation of the entailment.  Would you accept that?

[...]

Brian
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 09:03:13 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:51:03 EDT