- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 17:33:09 -0600
- To: Peter Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Cc: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>, RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Mar 8, 2013, at 2:53 PM, Peter Patel-Schneider wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote: > > On Mar 8, 2013, at 12:52 PM, Peter Patel-Schneider wrote: > > > [...] > > > > > A different way to go would be to just have interpretations map b-nodes directly. This would treat bnodes as skolems - the only difference between a bnode and a skolem is that a bnode *cannot* escape into the wild. > > That would be a real change to the semantics, with far-reaching consequences. It owuld effectively remove bnodes altogether (other than an a syntax for local names). > > Pat > > But what would the consequences be? I'm having a hard time thinking of any, except when the bnode scope goes beyond a single graph. > Well, basic entailments such as :a :p :b . |= _:x :p :b . would not hold. Or, another example, :a :p "25"^xsd:integer . |= _:x :p "25"xsd:integer . _:x rdf:type xsd:integer . Pat > peter > > ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Friday, 8 March 2013 23:33:45 UTC