- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 14:08:23 +0100
- To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Let me try to word a requirement that is less specific about detail, and more about intent. Proposal ------------- 3.4 Subgraph Results It must be possible to select an entailed subgraph of a queried graph. In this case, the results are themselves an RDF graph. ---------------------- I used "entailed" - is that right usage Pat? - to mean an RDF subgraph of triples that are also true given the original ground facts given any level of inference the implementation cares to have. I left out any mention of RDFS, OWL etc. There are many characteristics of a source a client might be interested in (speed, reliability, inference capability) and it is out of scope to describe sources. I tried to say as little as possible about the returned graph except to note that it is not the only form of results we will provide. As such, this is little more than the statements in the the charter where it says: ] 1. Scope of RDF Data Access Working Group .... ] The principal task of the RDF Data Access Working Group is to ] gather requirements and to define an HTTP and/or SOAP-based ] protocol for selecting instances of subgraphs from an RDF graph. .... ] 1.8 Derived Graphs ] The working group must recognize that RDF graphs are often ] constructed by aggregation from multiple sources and through ] logical inference, and that sometimes the graphs are never ] materialized. Such graphs may be arbitrarily large or infinite. Significant points: 1/ It says "selecting instances of subgraphs" 2/ It says "RDF Graph" in section 1. That's defined in RDF Concepts [1]: "An RDF graph is a set of RDF triples" Section 1.8 extends that to "construction ... through logical inference". Andy [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/#section-rdf-graph
Received on Friday, 7 May 2004 09:08:52 UTC