- From: Enrico Franconi <franconi@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 12:23:20 +0100
- To: Enrico Franconi <franconi@inf.unibz.it>
- Cc: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <C6ADECB7-60E3-49B8-BFC4-13945246C3B5@inf.unibz.it>

Regarding the points below (about which I'm still waiting), I got further feedback about being unclear the 'fixed' role of BGP' and B, which in fact do not appear anymore after section 2.5. We need some text emphasing this fact; something like at the end of 2.5.1 "From now on we will say that a BGP matches with pattern solution S on graph G, omitting the specific E-entailment, the fixed scoping set B, and the fixed scoping graph BGP'." Does it make sense? cheers --e. On 4 Feb 2006, at 12:01, Enrico Franconi wrote: > On 30 Jan 2006, at 20:26, Seaborne, Andy wrote: >>> On 30 Jan 2006, at 19:01, Seaborne, Andy wrote: >>>> Enrico Franconi wrote: >>>>> """ >>>>> Definition: Basic Graph Pattern E-matching >>>>> (...) >>>>> """ >>>> >>>> Awaiting consensus. >> >> This definition was the outcome of the WG decision last week. >> There needs to be stronger reasons for changing it. > > I still believe that this definition requires a restyling, due to: > > 1) missing explicit quantification (some term has been properly > introduced before being mentioned: B and BGP') > > 2) the notion of "introduced by" should be replaced by the more > precise "in the range of" > > 3) we need to emphasise that G' and B are somehow fixed - so that > we can ignore mentioning them from now on (as we actually do > whenever we mention matching in the rest of the document). > > Let me propose a minimal editorial change wrt the current version. > > Current: > """ > Given an entailment regime E, a basic graph pattern BGP, and RDF > graph G, with scoping graph G', then BGP E-matches with pattern > solution S on graph G with respect to scoping set B if: > > * BGP' is a basic graph pattern that is graph-equivalent to BGP > * G' and BGP' do not share any blank node labels. > * (G' union S(BGP')) is a well-formed RDF graph for E-entailment > * G E-entails (G' union S(BGP')) > * The RDF terms introduced by S all occur in B. > """ > > Proposed: > """ > Given an entailment regime E, a scoping set B, a basic graph > pattern BGP, an RDF graph G, a scoping graph G' for G, then BGP E- > matches with pattern solution S on graph G with respect to the > fixed scoping graph G' and scoping set B if: > > * there is some BGP', > a basic graph pattern that is graph-equivalent to BGP > * G' and BGP' do not share any blank node labels > * (G' union S(BGP')) is a well-formed RDF graph for E-entailment > * G E-entails (G' union S(BGP')) > * the RDF terms in the range S all occur in B > """ > > cheers > --e.

## Attachments

- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s

Received on Friday, 10 February 2006 11:23:49 UTC