On 30 September 2011 21:11, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote: > On Fri, 2011-09-30 at 12:02 +0200, Richard Cyganiak wrote: >> >> > (imagine for example a owl:sameAs statement between two graphs IRI >> in a >> > SPARQL engine supporting OWL inference; what would that mean?) >> >> owl:sameAs means that two terms denote the same resource. As written >> in the ED, use of those terms as graph names is entirely orthogonal to >> that. >> >> I think that's a good thing. Named graphs are key to trust and >> provenance. Trust and provenance must happen at a lower level in the >> stack, before reasoning and inference kick in. W3C's version of the >> layer cake, where trust sits above reasoning, cannot work. The moment >> you reason with OWL over untrusted data, you [have problems]. > > I don't think we need to throw out reasoning on the fourth column. As > long as we're careful about what it means -- eg: it denotes an IR which > may give you a Graph What's an IR? Is a book an IR? Do we define IR in a W3C RDF REC, or by reference to some other? Is http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#id-resources the best candidate on offer? DanReceived on Saturday, 1 October 2011 23:11:20 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:09 UTC