- From: Barry Norton <barry.norton@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 20:06:27 +0200
- To: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- CC: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.net>, Bob Ferris <zazi@elbklang.net>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
I wondered who'd be first to mention lazy-evaluation FP :) (My example would have been in Haskell) Barry On 30/06/10 20:01, Hugh Glaser wrote: > <Enjoying a trip down memory lane when I used to be functional> > > On 30/06/2010 12:45, "Toby Inkster"<tai@g5n.co.uk> wrote: > > >> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 10:54:20 +0100 >> Dan Brickley<danbri@danbri.org> wrote: >> >> >>> That said, i'm sure sameAs and differentIndividual (or however it is >>> called) claims could probably make a mess, if added or removed... >>> >> You can create some pretty awesome messes even without OWL: >> >> # An rdf:List that loops around... >> >> <#mylist> a rdf:List ; >> rdf:first<#Alice> ; >> rdf:next<#mylist> . >> > That's not a mess, that's pretty. > And can be pretty useful. > An infinite list of Alices - I think Lewis Carroll would have heartily > approved. > >> # A looping, branching mess... >> >> <#anotherlist> a rdf:List ; >> rdf:first<#anotherlist> ; >> rdf:next<#anotherlist> . >> > An interesting structure. > > I'm sure I can think of some use cases for the first, but not so sure about > the second in RDF. > > Am I right in thinking that owl:sameAs is a bit like a "let" or "where" > clause? > > I like to think that Strachey would be using RDF to bring down my SPARQL > endpoint by getting it to calculate things like infinite precision > multiplication. > Any offers what that Prime Sieve would look like in RDF? > Here is what it looks like in Miranda: > primes = sieve [ 2.. ] > where > sieve (p:x) = p : sieve [ n | n<- x; n mod p> 0 ] > > >
Received on Wednesday, 30 June 2010 18:07:07 UTC