- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:55:36 -0400
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- CC: "public-rdf-wg@w3.org >> public-rdf-wg" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 04/27/2012 10:28 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote: > > Coming back to opacity-vs-transparency: > > As you say: > - the graph named g says that :d is related to :f via :e > > If we also know, somehow, that :c = :d, does it follow that: > - the graph named g says that :c is related to :f via :e > ? > > I don't think so, and that's what I mean when I say I think named > graphs are opaque. > > -- Sandro > This is much more plausible than your initial phrasing of the question. I would agree that knowledge outside an RDF graph (named or not) does not leak into the graph. That is, just because the weather is sunny, does not mean that all RDF graphs imply that the weather is sunny. peter
Received on Friday, 27 April 2012 14:56:07 UTC