- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:17:24 +0100
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
> 1. The default graph is asserted
>
> "{<a> <b> <c>}" entails turtle("<a> <b> <c>")
+1
> 2. Named graphs are not asserted
>
> "<u> {<a> <b> <c>}" does not entail turtle("<a> <b> <c>")
+1
> 3. Named graphs are opaque
>
> "<u> {<a> <b> <c>}" does not entail "<u> {<a> <b> _:x}"
-1
Entailment within a graph still applies.
> 4. Graph labels denote just like in RDF
>
> "{<u1> owl:sameAs<u2>}<u1> {<a> <b> <c>}"
> owl-entails
> "<u2> {<a> <b> <c>}"
{<u1> owl:sameAs<u2>}
<u1> {<a> <b> <c>}
owl-entails
<u2> {<a> <b> <c>}
Maybe. The key is "owl-entails" and any RDF semantics in scope/context.
> 5. Blank nodes labels have file scope
+1
> 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
>
> 6. In trig, @union can be used in place of the default graph
>
> "@union<u> {<a> <b> <c>}" entails turtle "<a> <b> <c>"
In concept, +1
There are some details around here :-)
> 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>}".
+1?
the decision to merge or not merge is an application decision ("do I
trust <u> graph?" "do I trust source foo?" etc etc) as it is for two graphs.
If app wants to merge to datasets by merging same-label graphs, then
this is the outcome.
Andy
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2012 15:18:01 UTC