- From: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@uni-ulm.de>
- Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 18:27:11 +0100
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
[snip] >>> 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." > > I don't see this text in the query doc. Having made the first change to > query, is that enough? The documents somehow got out of sync here. Query still has: 1. For any E-consistent active graph AG, the entailment regime E uniquely specifies a scoping graph SG that is E-equivalent to AG. but in the Ent. Regimes doc we changed this to 1. 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. I believe we decided this at the last F2F, but not sure. We definitely decided at some point to have " uniquely specified up to RDF graph equivalence" in there. Birte > Andy > > >>> >>> 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 > > -- Jun. Prof. Dr. Birte Glimm Tel.: +49 731 50 24125 Inst. of Artificial Intelligence Secr: +49 731 50 24258 University of Ulm Fax: +49 731 50 24188 D-89069 Ulm birte.glimm@uni-ulm.de Germany
Received on Wednesday, 14 December 2011 17:30:12 UTC