Re: Signalling entailment in queries

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Andy Seaborne <> wrote:

> The other area I have a problem with is the notion that it's just
> entailment.  Entailment (or rules) is just one process that can be applied
> on loading.  I don't see a clear dividing line with client-supplied rules
> (i.e. inline premises), graph building, or data cleaning and mangling stages
> and ETL.

Indeed. We could make a very long list of other stuff people want to
do to RDF data.

The only relevant difference re: reasoning is that W3C has a bunch of
prior work defining precisely reasoning kinds and giving them URLs,
etc. That makes it at least possible to do something w/ reasoning
that's much harder to do w/ all that other stuff -- today.

That said, this whole area still seems to me like scope creep: we
should finish this WG up sooner than later so we can declare victory
and get back to building more stuff.


PS--As a practical issue, SPARQL needs to finish IMO before any future
RDF WG gets started, since a goodly # of people here are conceivable
workers over there and there are still only 24 hrs in each day...

Received on Wednesday, 21 July 2010 18:39:27 UTC