- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 11:19:36 -0600
- To: Enrico Franconi <franconi@inf.unibz.it>
- Cc: "Peter F.Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 17:12 +0100, Enrico Franconi wrote: > > On 22 Mar 2006, at 15:48, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > >> From section 2.5.2: > >> > >> "A pattern solution can then be defined as follows: to match a basic > >> graph pattern under simple entailment, it is possible to proceed by > >> finding a mapping from blank nodes and variables in the basic graph > >> pattern to terms in the graph being matched; a pattern solution is > >> then a mapping restricted to just the variables, possibly with blank > >> nodes renamed. Moreover, a uniqueness property guarantees the > >> interoperability between SPARQL systems: given a graph and a basic > >> graph pattern, the set of all the pattern solutions is unique up to > >> blank node renaming." > > > > This is a claim, not a theorem (with proof). > > Sure :-) > Stay tuned for the explicit proof. Enrico, you do not mean to imply that the RDF Data Access Working Group plans to deliver a proof, do you? I'm not aware of any such plans. Please keep in mind that this public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org mailing list is a place for responses on behalf of the RDF Data Access Working Group; it's best to be very clear when you're acting not on behalf of the WG but on your own behalf, lest readers get the wrong impression. > --e. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 22 March 2006 17:19:46 UTC