From: Joseph Coffman (jcoffman@bbn.com)
Date: 10/24/01
> > >It seemed to me there was a real disagreement at the end of the >joint-committee call today. Here's a test case. If I understood >correctly, Pat (and I) will vote for (b) and Richard will vote for >(a). > >The knowledge base contains the statements: "Pat's car is blue, and >there is something colored red." Somewhat more formally: > > RDF(PatsCar, color, blue). > exists x (RDF(x, color, red)). > >or in N-Triples (ignorng URI syntax) > > <patsCar> <color> <blue>. > _:a <color> <red>. > >And then we have the query: "is there anything with any color?", or >RDF(?x, color, ?y). > >Do we get back > >(a) 1 triple > > <patsCar> <color> <blue>. > >or (b) 2 triples > > <patsCar> <color> <blue>. > _:b <color> <red>. > >(where I've changed the _:a to _:b just to emphasise that it is an >arbitrary term, and its scope does not carry over from the knowledge >base to the response). > >or (c) 2 triples with genid (skolem constant) > > <patsCar> <color> <blue>. > <reasonerCreatedSymbol79878687> <color> <red>. > >If everyone actually is happy with (b), then we were in fact in >violent agreement. If not, then there's a real issue here. > > -- sandro http://www.w3.org/People/Sandro/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST