- From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 09:13:31 +0100
- To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 11:03:15 -0400, Bijan Parsia wrote: > >In earlier WG discussions, DanC point out that a graph and its RDFS > >closure are not the same and would be expected to have different URIs > >as graphs to query. > > That's another reasoner for me to prefer an entailment view. The graph > queried under rdf entailment and rdfs entailment *are* the same, > although the answers they give are different. I have no desire to have > a URI for the closures of any kind of any document. I'm absolutly not qualified to talk about the logical issues here, but from a practical point of view, both as a user and developer its very useful to be able to distinguish a graph as fetched from the web and any entailments from it. Pre-SPARQL versions of 3store did not seperate them (as far as the user could tell), and it caused confusion. - Steve
Received on Thursday, 29 September 2005 08:13:59 UTC