- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 14:13:28 +0000
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>, RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 7 Nov 2012, at 13:29, Ivan Herman wrote: > I would also like to see two things added to the note: > > - drawing attention on the fact that these triples go beyond RDF triples, and they are there for the purpose of getting the rules working Let's be precise: They are there to make the *presentation* of the rules *simpler*. If it was just about making the rules *work*, there would be ways of achieving this that don't involve a generalized version of RDF graphs. But that would end up being more awkward. Best, Richard > - making it clear that the rule engine is supposed to throw away non-RDF triples at the end of processing when returning an expanded graph. > > I also realize that doing this means that, formally, we can forget about those confusing rules that 'replace' literals with blank nodes. Which is fine for the rule set but it may be worth keeping a note in the text making clear to implementers that, if they rely on RDF comformant environments, that is a possible approach they may use (actually, as of today, I would probably not even use blank nodes there, because that is always a scary thing to refer to, but rather skolem URI-s, now that we have them...) > > Ivan > >> >> Best, >> Richard > > > ---- > Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > mobile: +31-641044153 > FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf > > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:13:57 UTC