W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > October to December 2003

Re: RDF Semantics, non-lean RDF graphs, and redundancy of content

From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 11:47:35 -0600
Message-Id: <p06001f30bbf5235365a8@[10.1.31.1]>
To: www-rdf-comments@w3.org

<snip>

>>
>>I don't quite understand the sentence "Non-lean graphs have internal
>>redundancy and express the same content as their lean subgraphs." From the
>>modelling point of view, this seems rather important. Perhaps the concept
>>"redundancy" should be defined in this context?
>
>Well, it was intended only as a helpful remark: the formal 
>definition stands by itself. The point of the word 'redundancy' is 
>that the content of one part of the graph can be inferred from other 
>parts. For example if the graph contains
>
>ex:pat rdf:type ex:human .
>_:x rdf:type ex:human .
>
>then it is redundant in this sense: the second triple adds no new 
>content to the first triple, and can be inferred from it. This graph 
>says in effect, Pat is human, and a human exists.  So this graph is 
>equivalent in content to the first triple alone, and could be 
>removed without changing the meaning of the graph.

That is, the second triple could be removed without, etc...

<snip>

Pat Hayes
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC	(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501			(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Thursday, 4 December 2003 12:47:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:33 GMT