Re: error in Semantics document

>The following claim from RDF Semantics, Section 0.3, is incorrect:
>
>	In particular, any graph obtained by replacing all blank nodes by
>	new blank nodes not in the original graph is an instance of the
>	original and also, by inverting the mapping, has it as an
>	instance. By our convention, such isomorphic graphs are considered
>	to be identical.
>
>To see this consider the ``original'' graph
>
>	a:b c:d _:a .
>	a:b c:e _:b .
>
>and the ``new'' graph
>
>	a:b c:d _:c .
>	a:b c:e _:c .

The wording is careless and unclear.  The intent was that the blank 
nodes would be replaced one at a time or in a 1:1 fashion, ie as a 
re-naming.  I will find a better way to express this.

Pat

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola              			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501           				(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ai.uwf.edu	          http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
s.pam@ai.uwf.edu   for spam

Received on Friday, 7 February 2003 12:24:04 UTC