- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
- Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 14:43:59 +0000
- To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- CC: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 05/01/2010 2:27 PM, Axel Polleres wrote: > I don't see any problems with that reformulation and it seems to be clearer > indeed to include that in the definition. Andy? Steve? I don't think changing solely the definition of Pattern Instance Mapping is the best way to do this. Andy > > We probably won't get there today, but will keep it in mind to bring > this up separately in the agenda in some of the next TCs. > > Axel > > On 5 Jan 2010, at 14:14, Birte Glimm wrote: > >> The current definition says: >> A Pattern Instance Mapping, P, is the combination of an RDF instance >> mapping, σ, and solution mapping, μ. P(x) = μ(σ(x)) >> >> below the definition there the new sentence: >> For a BGP 'x', P(x) denotes the result of replacing blank nodes b in x >> for which σ is defined with σ(b) and all variables v in x for which μ >> is defined with μ(v). >> >> I suggest to put that sentence into the definition and relate it to >> P(x) = μ(σ(x)). For example: >> A Pattern Instance Mapping, P, is the combination of an RDF instance >> mapping, σ, and solution mapping, μ. For a BGP x, P(x) denotes the >> result of replacing each blank node b in x for which σ is defined with >> σ(b) and each variable v in x for which μ is defined with μ(v), also >> denoted as P(x) = μ(σ(x)). >> >> Basically, my goal is to make this definition clearer. I think the >> definition should say what x is since it is not a defined term like >> RDF-T for example. I also think the definition should say what it >> means to apply a solution mapping or an RDF instance mapping to a BGP. >> These are mappings from variables/bnodes to terms. It is never defined >> what the functions to with BGPs. They don't map BGPs to terms. Here it >> is assumed that they replace >> variables/bnodes with the corresponding mappings. That has to be said >> IMO. It can all be guessed, but it is a definition and it is an >> important definition. I do not suggest to change anything in the >> meaning. For me that still counts as errata because the definition >> just did not mention what it should have mentioned. >> >> Anyway, I just wanted the spec to be clear, but if there are >> objections, I will not spend any more time on this issue. >> >> Birte >> >> 2010/1/4 Axel Polleres<axel.polleres@deri.org>: >>> Hi Birte, >>> >>>> Query 1.1 uses the Query 1.0 definition and adds a sentence below to >>>> clarify this, but I would prefer to actually extend the definition >>>> accordingly if the WG is not opposed to that. IMO, the definition >>>> leaves a lot for readers to figure out themselves and it is quite an >>>> essential definition. Such a change would not change the meaning of >>>> the definition, but extend it so that it is clear what is meant. >>> >>> Do you have a concrete proposal for improval to extend the definition? >>> I'd assume if so, we can discuss it, although probably there is not >>> enough time left to agree and include it in this round, so I'd prefer to >>> postpone this issue to after the next WD round. >>> >>> best, >>> Axel >>> >>> On 4 Jan 2010, at 15:00, Birte Glimm wrote: >>> >>>> Axel, >>>> if there is some time in tomorrow's telecon, I would like to discuss >>>> whether it is possible to clarify the definition of Pattern Instance >>>> Mapping in Query 1.1. >>>> >>>> The Query 1.0 definition says: >>>> A Pattern Instance Mapping, P, is the combination of an RDF instance >>>> mapping, σ, and solution mapping, μ. P(x) = μ(σ(x)) >>>> >>>> The problem is that it is never said what x is and readers have to >>>> guess that it is a BGP. Even if they guess that x is a BGP, then it is >>>> still the case that sigma and mu are only defined for blank nodes and >>>> variables as input, so readers again have to guess that in this case >>>> it is meant that the blank nodes and variables in the BGP x are >>>> replaced with the values given by mu and sigma. >>>> >>>> Query 1.1 uses the Query 1.0 definition and adds a sentence below to >>>> clarify this, but I would prefer to actually extend the definition >>>> accordingly if the WG is not opposed to that. IMO, the definition >>>> leaves a lot for readers to figure out themselves and it is quite an >>>> essential definition. Such a change would not change the meaning of >>>> the definition, but extend it so that it is clear what is meant. >>> >>> Do you have a concrete proposal to extend the definition? >>> >>>> Birte >>>> >>>> >>>> 2010/1/4 Axel Polleres<axel.polleres@deri.org>: >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> first of all, Happy 2010 and looking fwd to welcome you to our first TC this year! >>>>> On Tuesday, we obviously want to check the status of the reviews and go through them as far >>>>> as there are any critical comments. We should also check the schedule in case there are reviews >>>>> missing still, since we want to make a decision to publish (based on reviews& subsequent >>>>> updates made by editors) in two weeks at the latest. >>>>> >>>>> In case we still have time left with all that on Tuesday (given the speed we rushed through all >>>>> docs in the last TC before christmas, you never know), I'd like to have a look over the >>>>> update ISSUEs mentioned in Paul's and Andy's mails [1,2]. >>>>> >>>>> 1. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009OctDec/0628.html >>>>> 2. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009OctDec/0674.html), >>>>> >>>>> The agenda can be found as usual at: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-01-05 >>>>> Will try to complete links to the reviews sent so far before the TC... >>>>> >>>>> best, >>>>> Axel >>>>> >>>>> ============================ >>>>> Call in details >>>>> >>>>> When joining please don't identify yourself verbally; instead, identify yourself to Zakim on IRC >>>>> >>>>> • Date of Call: Tuesday January 05, 2010 >>>>> • Time of Call: 15:00 UK, 10:00 (East US) >>>>> • Dial-In #: +1.617.761.6200 (Cambridge, MA) >>>>> • Dial-In #: +33.4.89.06.34.99 (Nice, France) >>>>> • Dial-In #: +44.117.370.6152 (Bristol, UK) >>>>> • Participant Access Code: 77277# (SPARQ) >>>>> • IRC Channel: irc.w3.org port 6665 channel #sparql ([irc:irc.w3.org:6665/sparql]) >>>>> • Web-based IRC (member-only): http://www.w3.org/2001/01/cgi-irc (Firefox IRC addon: chatzilla) >>>>> • Duration: 60 minutes >>>>> • Chair: Axel Polleres >>>>> • Scribe: Olivier Corby (Scribe List) >>>>> • Link to Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-01-05 >>>>> >>>>> [edit] Agenda >>>>> >>>>> • Admin >>>>> • PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-12-22 >>>>> • Next meeting: 2010-01-12 @ 15:00 UK / 10:00 EST (scribe: Alex Passant) >>>>> • Comment handling - see http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Comments >>>>> • Liaisons - Anything to report? >>>>> • RIF WG (Axel) >>>>> • RDB2RDF WG (Orri) >>>>> • eGov (SteveH) >>>>> • Document Reviews and schedule for publication: >>>>> • http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/ >>>>> • http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.1/ >>>>> • http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/protocol-1.1/ >>>>> • http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/service-description-1.1/ >>>>> • http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/ >>>>> • http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/property-paths/Overview.xml >>>>> • http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/entailment/xmlspec.xml >>>>> • Time allowed: Update ISSUEs, Can we close some? see Paul's and Andy's mails. >>>>> [edit] Regrets >>>>> >>>>> • Lee Feigenbaum >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 306 >>>> Computing Laboratory >>>> Parks Road >>>> Oxford >>>> OX1 3QD >>>> United Kingdom >>>> +44 (0)1865 283529 >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 306 >> Computing Laboratory >> Parks Road >> Oxford >> OX1 3QD >> United Kingdom >> +44 (0)1865 283529 >> > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. > For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email > ______________________________________________________________________
Received on Tuesday, 5 January 2010 14:44:38 UTC