W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-comments@w3.org > June 2013

Re: bNodes as graph identifiers (ISSUE-131)

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 11:36:16 +0100
Cc: <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Message-Id: <52C9C631-048D-446C-A339-BB64C4D49724@garlik.com>
To: "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
On 2013-06-03, at 11:17, "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote:

> On Monday, June 03, 2013 11:40 AM, Steve Harris wrote:
>> On 2013-05-31, at 17:00, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>> How can software running in a browser or an email client create a
>> proper dataset?
>>> It wants to say:
>>> { :s1 :p1 :g }
>>> :g { :s2 :p2 :o2 }
>>> where the s, p, and o terms are well-known URIs.    What can it use
>> for :g if it's NOT communicating in some application-specific way with
>> a Web Server?
>> One of is under a serious misapprehension about the capabilities of a
>> 2013-era web client.
>> Why should it be harder to mint a unique identifier when creating a
>> document, then it is when parsing it? Client consume as well as create
>> data.
> Because when creating a document you need to mint a *globally valid* unique
> identifier whereas when you parse it you just have to deal with *locally
> valid* unique identifiers.

That's not necessarily true.

Many systems (but I'm sure not all) feel they have to create the as identifiers globally unique to allow the references to be usable externally to the store.

> Globally valid also means that other systems may start to use that
> identifier whereas with a just locally valid identifier that becomes
> impossible (which is a desired feature in this case).

I don't think it's often a *desired* feature… I can't think of any instances of that.

- Steve

Steve Harris
+44 20 3042 4132
Registered in England and Wales 653331 VAT # 887 1335 93
80 Victoria Street, London, SW1E 5JL
Received on Monday, 3 June 2013 10:36:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:29:57 UTC