Re: Comments on the new RDF Test Cases draft

On Wed, 8 May 2002, Massimo Marchiori wrote:

> [sent already, but it didn't seem it went thru... maybe just the thin
> air of Hawaii... retrying now, sorry again for double postings]
> I just quickly read (yes, same flight... ;) the new RDF Test Cases as per
> In the main text (not time so far to read all the actual use cases... ;)
> there is in Section 2:
> <quote>
> A parser is considered to pass the test if it produces a graph isomorphic
> with the graph described by the N-triples output document.
> </quote>
> This is wrong, according to the standard definition of graph isomorphism
> (care when using words without accurate definitions...!).

Could you give a citation for the 'standard definition', and outline how
we deviate from that concept?

> You'd define it using the RDF-MT semantical equivalence instead.

Hmm, not so sure. RDF parsers aren't expected to exhibit knowledge of all
the semantic equivalencies implied by RDF's MT.



Received on Tuesday, 7 May 2002 20:16:27 UTC