Re: [Eulermoz-developers] We have a doubt

[<jos...@ag...>]

> Hello all.
>
> Sorry Jos last two messages were meant to be sent to the list, it wasn't
> private at all :(
> I re-send them just to keep track.
>
> 1=BA)    The question about how parser should interpret this N3
> expression, what  the set of triples generated by the parser should be.
> Whether this triples are just :s :p :o
> or  {} implies parser has to reify them.

when we get an rdf graph containing

{{{:Greta gc:childIn :dp.
:Jos gc:childIn :dp.
:Greta ont:differentIndividualFrom :Jos} log:implies
{:Greta gc:sibling :Jos}} log:implies
{:Jos gc:sibling :Greta}.

we actually have just 1 triple
  {subject=5Fgraph} log:implies {object=5Fgraph}.
for which we create an instance of C# class

public class Euler {
  internal Euler subj =3D null;                   // RDF subject
  internal String verb =3D null;                  // RDF predicate as=20
absoluteized verb
  internal Euler obj =3D null;                    // RDF object
  internal String cverb =3D null;                 // compact verb
  ...
  internal Euler near =3D null;                   // to construct a=20
conjunction
  ...

we then do the same recursively for subj and obj graphs

we don't have externalized reification


> 2=BA)    Yes , we were not sure but it looked like.
> But as we tell you before our test cases will be yours and this is taken
> from :
>
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/eulersharp/2004/02swap/testCases/ge=
dcom-relations.n3?rev=3D1.1&view=3Dauto
>
>
> line 75.

OK, is clarified by Guido
# rule added for N3Engine - G.Naudts
and with rationale in
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread=5Fid=3D5792360&forum=5F=
id=3D42019

--=20
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/