- From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 15:13:47 +0100
- To: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>
- Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
At 07:48 AM 6/24/02 -0700, Seth Russell wrote: >From: "Graham Klyne" <GK@NineByNine.org> > > > *If* multiple arcs with the same (s p o) are allowed in the graph syntax, > > they would have exactly the same semantic consequences as a single such > > arc. I can't recall which way the RDFcore WG has decided on the syntactic > > legality of this. The original M&S talks of sets of statements, so can be > > read as disallowing multiple instances. But my main point is that it > > doesn't really make any difference and applications shouldn't be sensitive > > to multiple instances. > >Well shouldn't an application be sensitive to who said a triple and when >they said it ? Depends on the application. That puts the whole question into a different context (sic). If using reification to track provenance, its not the same triple that appears multiple times. If using multiple graphs (documents) for this, then I suppose I should have said: applications shouldn't be sensitive to multiple instances if a triple in a single graph. #g ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Tuesday, 25 June 2002 10:47:55 UTC