Trying to figure out what kinds of test cases might even record decisions about graph concepts. Here's an experiment, below. Dan 1. For each $X from 'g-box', 'g-snap', 'g-text' ): Can this whatever-it-is RDF graphy-thing, <http://example.org/1> <http://example.org:80/2> "A" . ...ever be considered the self-same $X as <http://example.org/1:80> <http://example.org/2> "A" . (ie. one thing not two) Expanded version: Q: 1a) - Can <http://example.org/1> <http://example.org:80/2> "A" . be the same g-box as <http://example.org/1:80> <http://example.org/2> "A" . ? ... q might not make sense. Or "from the same g-box"? A: Sure. Q: 1b) - Can <http://example.org/1> <http://example.org:80/2> "A" . be the same g-snap as <http://example.org:80/1> <http://example.org:80/2> "A" . ? A: No. They are different g-snaps because the RDF content does not compare equal because they have different URI strings labelling different nodes (even if they always co-refer). Q: 1c) - Can <http://example.org/1> <http://example.org:80/2> "A" . be the same g-text as <http://example.org:80/1> <http://example.org/2> "A" . ? A: No. Considered textually, they have different forms, checksums, etc. Q: 2. Can <http://example.org/1> <http://example.org/2> "A" . ever NOT be the same g-snap as <http://example.org/1> <http://example.org/2> "A" . ? A: Sure. Maybe. Don't know. This is an example test case we might debate.Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2011 16:33:05 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:01 UTC