- From: Seaborne, Andy <Andy_Seaborne@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 14:45:05 -0000
- To: "'Graham Klyne'" <GK@NineByNine.org>
- Cc: "'public-esw@w3.org'" <public-esw@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: Graham Klyne [mailto:GK@NineByNine.org] > Sent: 23 January 2003 21:12 > To: Seaborne, Andy > Cc: 'public-esw@w3.org' > Subject: Re: Vocabulary for result sets > ... > > Hmmm... I wonder of there should be links to, or identifiers of, the > knowledge-base and query used, so that valid results from > different queries > can be differentiated. In practice, I think this kind of > testing is a > relatively closed-world activity, so maybe it doesn't matter. > Graham, Good point. A number of properties to annotate the result set would be good. Of course, nothing stops any properties being added ... but putting them in the vocabulary encourages their use. Are there any suitable properties from other vocabularies to reuse? Also - this could be the result from a query, not just recording information for a testcase. In this case, we still have a query->single graph approach but the presentation of the results isn't a subgraph of the original KB, but an encoding of the variable bindings. Each solution can be substituted into the pattern for the query to generate a sequence of subgraphs, each of which satisfy the query but the result set graph does not feel like knowledege extraction anymore. Andy
Received on Friday, 24 January 2003 09:45:26 UTC