W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > October 2013

Re: RDF-ISSUE-142: rdfs:Graph ? comment [RDF Semantics]

From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 07:56:45 +0200
Message-ID: <524BB59D.4000400@emse.fr>
To: Peter Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
CC: RDF Working Group <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Le 02/10/2013 04:07, Peter Patel-Schneider a écrit :
> We now have a proposal from Jeremy on this issue.
>
> The guts of the proposal is carried in one simple but pernicious word:
> MAY.  The proposal would allow RDF implementations to behave differently
> from each other on the same entailment regime.   I view this as
> destroying the last bits of interoperability in RDF, and thus will be
> voting against it.
>
> On the other hand, producing a new entailment regime that embodies the
> difference in behaviour that Jeremy appears to want would fit right into
> the way that divergence currently works in RDF.   I have no problem with
> the WG producing a WG note defining this entailment regime.  I would
> even be enthusiastic towards this note (but not to the point of writing
> any part of it) if it defined several entailment regimes that differ in
> their treatment of named graphs.

Isn't it exactly the purpose of the note I've written?  This note 
describes entailment regimes for RDF datasets that differ in their 
treatment of named graphs.


AZ

>
> 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 66 03
Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66
http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2013 05:57:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:33 UTC