- From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:26:23 +0100
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 09:06 18/09/03 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote:
>On Thu, 2003-09-18 at 08:17, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>[...]
> > The additional blank node was at the heart of the untidy proposals (either
> > explicitly or implicitly) and this proposal is essentially untidiness
> > revisited.
>
>Is it really? After a quick read, I also came to the
>conclusion that consideration of this proposal involves
>reopening the datatypes issue...
> http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfs-xml-schema-datatypes
>
>but just to confirm, Pat, in your proposal, does this
>entailment hold or not?
>
> <a> <b> "10" .
> <c> <d> "10" .
>
>entails
>
> <a> <b> _:l .
> <c> <d> _:l .
If I understand correctly, that entailment does hold, but it's not quite
the same as:
<rdf:Description rdf:about="a">
<b>10</b>
</rdf:Description>
<rdf:Description rdf:about="c">
<d>10</d>
</rdf:Description>
entails:
<rdf:Description rdf:about="a">
<b rdf:nodeId="l" />
</rdf:Description>
<rdf:Description rdf:about="c">
<d rdf:nodeId="l" />
</rdf:Description>
which, I think, also holds. The latter would resolve to:
<a> <b> _:n1 .
_:n1 xsd:string "10" .
<a> <b> _:n2 .
_:n2 xsd:string "10" .
entails:
<a> <b> _:n1 .
_:n1 xsd:string _:l .
<a> <b> _:n2 .
_:n2 xsd:string _:l .
in which the triples:
_:n1 xsd:string _:l .
_:n2 xsd:string _:l .
would be entailed by
_:n1 xsd:string "10" .
_:n2 xsd:string "10" .
as above, hence the result by subgraph entailment.
#g
------------
Graham Klyne
GK@NineByNine.org
Received on Friday, 19 September 2003 10:27:39 UTC