- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 09:09:48 +0100
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- CC: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Dan Connolly wrote: > "If SM is set of modifiers, and QS is a set of solutions of a query, we > write SM(QS) for the sequence formed by applying SM to the solution > sequence formed from QS." > -- > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#defn_SolutionSequenceModifer > 1.373 2005/06/06 14:45:18 > > > What is *the* sequence formed from QS? It follows the previous definition (which is based on the one you supplied) on how sets of solutions become sequences. I agree there isn't a unique sequence formed from the set of solutions. ------ If SM is set of modifiers, and QS is a set of solutions of a query, we write SM(QS) for *a* sequence formed by applying SM to *some* solution sequence formed from QS." ------ (without the **, obviously). Andy > > Feel free to wait until I come up with replacement text > to do anything about this... > > ... though I did propose definitions a while ago that > don't have this problem... > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2005May/0007 > > but you seem to have reorganized them substantially since then. > I'll see if I can come up with a fix within the organizational > style that you've chosen. > >
Received on Thursday, 9 June 2005 08:10:26 UTC