W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > February 2004

Re: Named graphs

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:41:28 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20040212.134128.40673617.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Cc: b.fallenstein@gmx.de, www-rdf-interest@w3.org

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Named graphs
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:35:28 +0000

> 
> 
> Is the N3 semantics of a bnode shared between two formulae clear?

Good question.

Is the N3 sematics of X clear, for any X?  My view would be a resounding NO.

> One of the motivations to allow bnodes as graph names was for N3 compatibility.
> 
> Jeremy

peter
Received on Thursday, 12 February 2004 13:45:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:58 UTC