- From: Rob Shearer <Rob.Shearer@networkinference.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 15:39:40 -0700
- To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "Kendall Clark" <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
- Cc: "Jim Hendler" <hendler@cs.umd.edu>, "RDF Data Access Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
> "The protocol should allow construction of notional RDF > graphs inferred (e.g. using standardized semantics such > as RDFS, OWL or emerging technologies such as SWRL or N3 > rules) so that queries may be posed against the inferred > knowledge base." I have a problem with that because it seems to imply that all knowlege *about* an RDF graph can be encoded *within* an RDF graph, and that's clearly not the case. (The charter similar slants things this way as well, which I think is a mistake.) It's perfectly sensible to know, for example, that an RDF graph must contain at least one of two possible triples, but not which one. Are you allowed to use that information to help answer queries about the graph? I think it would be a major mistake to make the use of such information a violation of the spec.
Received on Tuesday, 8 June 2004 18:41:26 UTC