W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > October 2011

Re: Equality of RDF bags

From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:19:28 +0200
Message-ID: <4EAA73A0.1070200@emse.fr>
To: Heiko Paulheim <paulheim@ke.tu-darmstadt.de>
CC: semantic-web@w3.org
Heiko,

rdf:li is an *XML* element defined by the RDF/XML serialisation syntax. 
It is NOT a term defined by the RDF vocabulary. In RDF, it does not mean 
anything in particular. rdf:_1, rdf:_2, etc don't mean much either but 
at least they are known to be ContainerMembershipProperties.

If you do not write RDF/XML documents, *never* use rdf:li.

So, Graph 1 is completely different from Graph 2a and Graph 2b.
Graph 2a and Graph 2b are not equivalent either in terms of formal 
semantics, but at least they have a certain level of "informal 
equivalence" in the sense that they "intend" to describe the same set.


AZ

Le 28/10/2011 08:59, Heiko Paulheim a écrit :
> Dear Pat,
>> The graphs are different.
>
> that hits me. If I consider the following three graphs:
>
> Graph 1:
> :b a rdf:Bag .
> :b rdf:li :ABook .
> :b rdf:li :AnotherBook .
>
> Graph 2a:
> :b a rdf:Bag .
> :b rdf:_1 :ABook .
> :b rdf:_2 :AnotherBook .
>
> Graph 2b:
> :b a rdf:Bag .
> :b rdf:_1 :AnotherBook .
> :b rdf:_2 :ABook .
>
> Given that the order of triples in an RDF document (especially in Graph
> 1) is considered not to be significant, is Graph 1 equivalent rather to
> 2a or 2b (while the latter two, as you say, are not equivalent to each
> other)?
>
> Thanks,
> Heiko.
>
>
Received on Friday, 28 October 2011 13:04:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:31 UTC