W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp@w3.org > March 2013

Re: A modest attempt to re-open ISSUE-20

From: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 17:11:15 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+OuRR95hKC_p=mn4RY8Oh_fqO6wY8pnwqdn+WpfJ6-4AshcRQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: James Leigh <james@3roundstones.com>
Cc: "public-ldp@w3.org" <public-ldp@w3.org>

On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 3:07 PM, James Leigh <james@3roundstones.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 10:03 +0100, Henry Story wrote:
> >
> > The relevant section of the Turtle spec is section 6.3
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/turtle/#relative-iri
> >
> >
> > Notice that you cannot use NTriples to do what you want either, since
> > you cannot
> > know when creating a resource what the URI of the created resource is
> > going to be.
> > You would need to only use blank nodes in the graph produced, which
> > would be
> > to say the least very awkward.
> In Callimachus, when a resource is created there is no funny base-uri
> going on (we use the RDF model). Although we use sparql-update format,
> any RDF format would work equally well for us including NTriples.
> Lets calls the to-be-created resource URI the entity URI. All the
> triples that are to-be-inserted to the store must either have a blank
> node subject, have a subject URI of the entity URI, or have a subject
> URI of the entity URI plus a fragment identifier. This makes it very
> clear what the entity URI is.

But it prevents you from POSTing an *incoming* graph to the entity
What if I want to create a person and state that "I know this person" ?


> It is up to the client to decide if that
> entity URI is serialized as a base directive or absolute (we encourage
> the client to provide their own base directive). It is up to the server
> if it will use the entity URI as-is or if it will substitute a different
> entity URI.
> Using RDF model for linked data resource creation works, we have a
> working implementation.
> Earlier we had experimented with changing base-uri when parsing, but it
> was too problematic for all the reasons stated in this thread and we
> replaced it with the above.
> Regards,
> James
Received on Thursday, 14 March 2013 16:11:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:03:10 UTC