W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > July 2010

Re: Brief comment on sd:name

From: Damian Steer <d.steer@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 13:20:33 +0100
Message-Id: <86309FAD-9570-402B-BF9E-C90A4CC600E5@bristol.ac.uk>
To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Apologies for following up. At a conference, and thought I'd revisit.

On 22 Jun 2010, at 18:23, Damian Steer wrote:

> Looking at:
> 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-sparql11-service-description-20100601/>
> 
> it seems that sd:name is supposed to be a resource:
> 
> <sd:namedGraph>
>    <rdf:Description>
>        <sd:name rdf:resource="http://www.example/named-graph"/>
> ...
> 
> However if:
> 
> <http://www.example/named-graph> owl:sameAs <http://www.example/another-named-graph>
> 
> then also:
> 
> <sd:namedGraph>
>    <rdf:Description>
>        <sd:name rdf:resource="http://www.example/another-named-graph"/>

That entailment, on reflection, looks perfectly fine:

"The IRI identifies a resource, and the resource is represented 
by a graph (or, more precisely: by a document that serializes a graph)." [1]

There is no connection between graph name and graph (which was my concern), however the nature of that relationship is such that we can talk about graph being identified by resources rather than literals.

Sorry for the noise.

Damian

[1] <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#namedGraphs>
Received on Tuesday, 13 July 2010 12:21:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 13 July 2010 12:21:14 GMT