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

Re: rdfs:Graph ? comment on http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-dataset and issue 35

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:38:18 -0400
Message-ID: <52310CFA.5090208@dbooth.org>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
CC: Jeremy J Carroll <jjc@syapse.com>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, "public-rdf-comments@w3.org Comments" <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
On 09/09/2013 02:51 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
>  The question though is, whether
> I(<http://my.graph.name.example.org/>) = the graph you want it to
> mean. The problem is that there are people who want to use an IRI to
> simultaneously denote a person (say) but also be the name of a graph
> (eg of information about that person). And they have deployed systems
> and much money vested in being able to do this.

Uh . . . this may be opening up a can of worms, but what you're saying 
sounds a lot like the IRI resource identity ambiguity issue that has 
been discussed quite a lot in the past.  In short, there is no conflict 
if either: (a) the class of persons has not been asserted to be disjoint 
with the class of graphs; or (b) the IRI denotes a person in one RDF 
interpretation (e.g. in one system) but denotes a graph in a different 
RDF interpretation (e.g. in a different system).

I don't know if this observation would help resolve the problem that 
you're mentioning though.

David
Received on Thursday, 12 September 2013 00:38:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:59:36 UTC