- From: John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>
- Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999 15:19:32 -0400
- To: "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>
- CC: Samuel Yang <syang@peoplemoverinc.com>, "'Dan Brickley'" <Daniel.Brickley@bristol.ac.uk>, "'www-rdf-comments@w3.org'" <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>, "'rdf-dev@mailbase.ac.uk'" <rdf-dev@mailbase.ac.uk>
Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote: > app1 adds (#A, #B, "2") > app2 adds (#A, #B, "2") > app1 dels (#A, #B, "2") > app2 queries for (#A, #B) values and should get "2". That depends on what the semantics of deleting statements might be. If deleting a statement merely means that *you* are no longer asserting it, then the above is correct, but has nothing to do with literals: all would be the same if "2" were replaced by #C. But if deletion means that the statement is not *true*, then app2 should fail. In general RDF has no mechanism for dealing with agents who think they know contradictory things. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn. You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn. Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)
Received on Friday, 9 April 1999 15:19:48 UTC