W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: Entailment Regimes Doc

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 09:57:45 +0200
Message-ID: <4AC460F9.40006@w3.org>
To: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
CC: "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>

Birte Glimm wrote:
>> Is the implication that inference only happens within a (named) graph?
> Good point. I have to check on that and see whether this is clear from
> the SPARQL 1.0 spec or whether we have to specify something for that
> in the ent. regimes. The notion of named or default graph is not used
> in the OWL context. I have never seen it in the RDF(S) spec either
> (maybe I forget), so if the SPARQL spec does not say anything, then we
> have to address that I guess. Any clues?

You did not forget:-) Names and default graphs are not concepts handled
by RDFS currently.



Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Thursday, 1 October 2009 07:58:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:00:57 UTC