- From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
- Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 10:51:22 -0700
- To: "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, <sean@mysterylights.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
From: "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>
> It can't just be a syntax error because (in the systems I imagine) we
> could infer "{S1 p o} is S1", from various inputs, like
> "{S2 p o} is S3" and "S2 = S1" and "S3 = S1".
> Each of those has fine syntax; it's the combined semantics that are in
> error.
Ok I see, and vote for your proposal. Let me see if I understand it. If
G1 and G2 are graphs, and the function "combine( G1, G2)" yields a new
graph that is the combination of both G1 and G2, then combine(G1, G2) fails
if a loop in present in the combination or if a loop can be infered in the
combination. Could you sketch an algorithm for combine, and\or is that the
way you would do it?
Seth Russell
http://robustai.net/sailor/
Received on Saturday, 24 August 2002 13:52:09 UTC