- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: 09 Jun 2003 16:38:43 +0100
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Cc: "Peter F. "Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 15:57, pat hayes wrote: > >The wording for closures is not correct. > > > >For example, rdf-closures are defined in Section 4.1 using > > > > Apply the rules se1 and se2 and .... to generate all RDF triples > > (i.e.[,] until none of the rules apply or the graph is unchanged.) > > [sic] > > > >However, if an RDF graph contains any triples always possible to apply rule > >se1 in a way that changes the graph. > > Yes, this needs to be reworded slightly. It is only necessary to use > these rules to generate a single generalization of each generalizable > triple to produce a closure. I will add prose to this effect. Does se1 need to fire at all if the object is a bnode? Similarly se2. Brian
Received on Wednesday, 11 June 2003 01:56:18 UTC