- From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:42:52 -0500
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <p05210614bb0a89699067@[10.0.100.24]>
While fixing a silly mistake in the MT document, I noticed the following. We require that RDF graphs contain no redundancies in the sense that the same triple cannot occur more than once in the graph. However, they can contain redundancies in the sense that a triple with a bnode in it can be duplicated with a different bnode, even though the resulting triples would look the same in a graph diagram. The resulting graph has no extra information in it, but this quirk allows an RDF graph to have infinitely many consequences. For example, a single triple a p b . has infinitely many consequences; _:x p b . a p _:y . _:z1 p _:z2 . _:z3 p _:z4 . -:z5 p _:z6 . .... where all these bnodes are distinct; see attached jpeg. My question is, does the WG feel that it might be worth ruling this out as a syntactic possibility? If this kind of bnode-duplication were ruled out, then the set of graphs simply entailed by any RDF graph would be finite. That would generalize the no-duplicate-triples condition implicit in our definition of a graph as a set, to treat triples which 'look' the same when you erase the bnode labels as though they literally were the same. 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@ihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Attachments
- application/mac-binhex40 attachment: blank_nodes_wazoo.jpg
Received on Monday, 9 June 2003 17:42:55 UTC