- From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:31:25 +0100
- To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
I have a question on the first condition in http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#sparqlBGPExtend "For any consistent active graph AG, the entailment regime E uniquely specifies a scoping graph SG that is E-equivalent to AG." shouldn't this - to be precise - rather talk about "E-consistency"? I.e.: "For any E-consistent active graph AG, the entailment regime E uniquely specifies a scoping graph SG that is E-equivalent to AG." (I'll have a similar comment in my Entailment review, I am working on) Also, note that in the Entailment Regimes document it says: "The scoping graph, SG, corresponding to any consistent active graph AG is uniquely specified up to RDF graph equivalence and is E-equivalent to AG." where essentially "up to RDF graph equivalence" has been added (IIRC we had some discussions around this). I suppose we should bring bot the Entailment and Query doc in sync wrt. the definition of these conditions. So, overall, I think this condition should read, in both documents: "The scoping graph, SG, corresponding to any E-consistent active graph AG is uniquely specified up to <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#section-graph-equality">RDF graph equivalence</a> and is E-equivalent to AG." Note: I also suggest adding a link to RDF Graph equivalence, in order to clarify that this means simple equivalence. cheers, Axel -- Dr. Axel Polleres url: http://www.polleres.net/ twitter: AxelPolleres
Received on Sunday, 11 December 2011 23:39:22 UTC