- 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