Re: `void :triples` redefined to be an estimate (#89)

I closed issue #89 with this comment:

---
Yes, I agree. Sorry for not having read that paragraph in the VoID
specification. I only had searched for the property name in it :-(

But that illustrates that it can help to be a bit more verbose in the
documentation of a property so that it can stand for itself - especially
when a term ("total number") is not used according to the usual
semantics ! Maybe that can be considered for a future version of the
VoID specification.
---

Cheers,
Andreas
---

Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> On 7 Jan 2015 at 13:01, Ruben Verborgh wrote:
>>>> I got a verbal confirmation of Richard Cyganiak, co-author of VoID,
>>>> that "void:triples was never meant to be an exact number".
>>>> But of course, if that's not what the spec says, we should be careful.
>>>
>>> Is there something we can point to? Even if it's just a post on some
> mailing
>>> list?
>>
>> Turns out we're totally covered, as pointed out to me by Richard:
>>
>> "As a general rule, statistics in VoID can always be provided as
>> approximate numbers." -http://www.w3.org/TR/void/#statistics
>>
>> I think that #89 can thus be closed,
>> and I would suggest to proceed with void:triples in the TPF spec for
> approximations
>> (but perhaps additionally recommend a Hydra predicate).
> 
> SGTM. Andreas?
> 
> 
> --
> Markus Lanthaler
> @markuslanthaler

Received on Saturday, 10 January 2015 19:08:06 UTC