- From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 20:42:50 +0100
- Cc: "SPARQL Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
References: <492f2b0b0910070452j9e03002l40dd02df4705f062@mail.gmail.com> <492f2b0b0910080334n38fb2a63r3dff36d95e2e88dd@mail.gmail.com> <4ACDDEB9.2060207@w3.org> <492f2b0b0910080635p6b8e5a3aj460f4051fbeff1b6@mail.gmail.com> <4e0424de7bbc475cffceb9b523bb96af.squirrel@webmail.sophia.w3.org> <492f2b0b0910090621v174b8481sde27c03eef76ebea@mail.gmail.com> <4AD2EE38.90908@w3.org> <492f2b0b0910120341p3c483e42s2e0b619c84bd3ee1@mail.gmail.com> <4AD30D8F.6070007@w3.org> <4AD31D1C.4010305@w3.org> <492f2b0b0910120647k79c12383g7e05575a04f34cd2@mail.gmail.com> <8DD13C2F-ABD9-4365-9FB2-3588187FE426@deri.org> <B6CF1054FDC8B845BF93A6645D19BEA3693F7D3F7A@GVW1118EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net> <D74F1FB6-BEAC-43F9-A49E-17291922464A@deri.org> <B6CF1054FDC8B845BF93A6645D19BEA3693FA224DC@GVW1118EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net> <A46EBF10-0D0D-4695-9D78-2EC10BFB7246@deri.org> <B6CF1054FDC8B845BF93A6645D19BEA3693FA224E4@GVW1118EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net> <150EAD9A-9B73-4B35-AB99-674E1C51CEB8@deri.org> <B6CF1054FDC8B845BF93A6645D19BEA3693FA224E9@GVW118EXC.americas.hpqcorp.net> To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1076) Return-Path: axel.polleres@deri.org X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Oct 2009 19:42:51.0120 (UTC) FILETIME=[031E7F00:01CA4F62] > There is issue 43 -- can we close that now? I am not entirely clear about whether that issue can be closed, admittedly. the issue text says: "Should entailment-regimes be declared over the whole dataset or individual graphs?" Let me try to summarise the ongoing discussion here: - we seem to all agree that entailment should not imply inferences across graphs - SD currently only allows to declare the same entailment regime for each graph on a single endpoint, since sd:supportedEntailment is declared per a service. - there are examples where people use different entailment regimes for different graphs in the same dataset. this can not be covered by current SD - Do we all need to extend SD here? Should it allow to declare different entailment regimes for different graphs in the default dataset of the service? Before closing the issue, I'd like to solicit a few more opinions/ examples for that. (Birte? Greg? Others?) I am not entirely sure at this point whether this is actually a new issue and 43 as it was raised is indeed done. best, Axel
Received on Saturday, 17 October 2009 19:43:25 UTC