- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 11:03:22 -0400
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-wg <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 10:38 -0400, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > This is all predicated on named graphs participating in entailment, which I > don't really agree with. I don't understand how you're looking at this. Do you have an alternative solution in mind, and does it address many/most of the use cases? > On 04/25/2012 10:08 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote: > > > > ==================================== > > > > > > 1. The default graph is asserted > > > > "{<a> <b> <c>}" entails turtle("<a> <b> <c>") > Absolutely. > > 2. Named graphs are not asserted > > > > "<u> {<a> <b> <c>}" does not entail turtle("<a> <b> <c>") > Definitely. > > 3. Named graphs are opaque > > > > "<u> {<a> <b> <c>}" does not entail "<u> {<a> <b> _:x}" > Absolutely NOT! I can't tell if you're disagreeing with the entailment or the test case. I think the entailment. -- Sandro > > 4. Graph labels denote just like in RDF > > > > "{<u1> owl:sameAs<u2>}<u1> {<a> <b> <c>}" > > owl-entails > > "<u2> {<a> <b> <c>}" > > No. > > 5. Blank nodes labels have file scope > > > > See SPARQL queries in > > http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Graphs_Design_6.1#Blank_Nodes > > or Skolemization example in > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Apr/0132.html > No, they have graph scope. > > > > 6. In trig, @union can be used in place of the default graph > > > > "@union<u> {<a> <b> <c>}" entails turtle "<a> <b> <c>" > @union seems to be the wrong name for this. > > > > 7. Datasets only say which triples are known to be in a named graph, > > not which triples are *not* in that named graph. > > > > The merge of "<u> {<a> <b> <c>}" and "<u> {<a> <b> <d>}" is > > "<u> {<a> <b> <c>,<d>}". > > > > Also "<u> {<a> <b> <c>,<d>}" entails "<u> {<a> <b> <c>}". > > > > > Yes > >
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2012 15:05:08 UTC