- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 20:16:26 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Massimo Marchiori <massimo@w3.org>
- cc: "Www-Rdf-Comments@W3. Org" <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
On Wed, 8 May 2002, Massimo Marchiori wrote: > [sent already, but it didn't seem it went thru... maybe just the thin > air of Hawaii... retrying now, sorry again for double postings] > > I just quickly read (yes, same flight... ;) the new RDF Test Cases as per > http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-testcases/ > In the main text (not time so far to read all the actual use cases... ;) > there is in Section 2: > <quote> > A parser is considered to pass the test if it produces a graph isomorphic > with the graph described by the N-triples output document. > </quote> > > This is wrong, according to the standard definition of graph isomorphism > (care when using words without accurate definitions...!). Could you give a citation for the 'standard definition', and outline how we deviate from that concept? > You'd define it using the RDF-MT semantical equivalence instead. Hmm, not so sure. RDF parsers aren't expected to exhibit knowledge of all the semantic equivalencies implied by RDF's MT. Dan -- mailto:danbri@w3.org http://www.w3.org/People/DanBri/
Received on Tuesday, 7 May 2002 20:16:27 UTC