- 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