- From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
- Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 19:10:36 +0100
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- CC: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Why not indeed? This was my original idea, modulo a little improper formulation (you can see the previous version in the wiki) but 1) Pat was very much against this formulation, and 2) the current formulation allows a dataset-interpretation to assign a "local" interpretation to a potentially infinite set of terms. This is particularly useful for reasoning with annotated triples (UC 6.2 in http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs-UC#.28B_priority.29_Reasoning_over_annotations). Le 06/03/2012 18:52, Peter F. Patel-Schneider a écrit : > From: Antoine Zimmermann<antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr> > Subject: Re: three kinds of dataset >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/RDF-Datasets-Proposal#Semantics >> >> What precedes this in the wiki is Richard's proposal, which concerns the >> syntax. Richard does not necessarily endorse the semantics. >> >> Le 06/03/2012 17:49, Peter F. Patel-Schneider a écrit : >>> By the way, where is Antoine's proposal? >>> >>> peter > > Why not just say that an RDF/RDFS/... dataset interpretation of > D = (G, {<n1,G1>, ...,<nk,Gk>}) > is a structure > I = (I, {<m1,I1>, ...,<mh,Ih>}) > where I is an RDF/RDFS/... interpretation of G > and for each 1<=i<=k there is a j, 1<=j<=h such that mj=ni > and Ij is an RDF/RDFS/... interpretation of Gi > (could also require ni distinct and h=k) > > Then D = (G, {<n1,G1>, ...,<nk,Gk>}) > entails D' = (G', {<n'1,G'1>, ...,<n'k',G'k'>}) > just when every RDF/RDFS/... datatset interpretation of D > is also an RDF/RDFS/... datatset interpretation of G' > > peter -- Antoine Zimmermann ISCOD / LSTI - Institut Henri Fayol École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Saint-Étienne 158 cours Fauriel 42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2 France Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 83 36 Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66 http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2012 18:10:56 UTC