- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 16:37:06 +0200
- To: eric@w3.org
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Eric wrote:
> During the last telecon, I suggested that we use terms from RDF Query
> and Rules Framework [1] to describe the requirements for each use
> case. The requirements could be layed out similarly to the language
> characteristics in the RDF Query Survey [2].
>
> I don't expect the framework to be complete, but I do expected that it
> will serve as a good starting point. We can argue about terms like
> disjunction in the abstract, or we can have them layed out in a
> document describing and constrasting them. Hopefully this can save us
> a little bit of tedium.
Concerning "disjunction" I tried a similar test case
given
:Xavier :worksAt :night.
:Xavier :worksIn :systemMaintenance.
and asking
{_:Y :worksIn :processControl} :or
{_:Y :worksIn :systemMaintenance; :worksAt :night}.
we got a direct answer
{:Xavier :worksIn :processControl} :or
{:Xavier :worksIn :systemMaintenance. :Xavier :worksAt :night}.
and we just assume implications such as
?P => {?P :or ?Q}.
?Q => {?P :or ?Q}.
(but had to fix some "variable" issues
in the euler running code...)
Of course, posing 2 questions and merging
their answer graphs should also work.
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/11/13-RDF-Query-Rules/terms
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/11/13-RDF-Query-Rules/#summary
very interesting
> --
> -eric
>
> office: +81.466.49.1170 W3C, Keio Research Institute at SFC,
> Shonan Fujisawa Campus, Keio University,
> 5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa 252-8520
> JAPAN
> +1.617.258.5741 NE43-344, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02144 USA
> cell: +1.857.222.5741 (does not work in Asia)
>
> (eric@w3.org)
> Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than
> email address distribution.
--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Thursday, 8 April 2004 10:37:48 UTC