W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2011

Re: Turtle support for Multiple Graphs, suggestion

From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 12:50:04 -0400
Message-ID: <4D96023C.4020108@thefigtrees.net>
To: nathan@webr3.org
CC: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Hi Nathan,

What would be the benefit of inventing something like this compared to 
using TriG which is similar in spirit and already in (some) use?

Lee

On 4/1/2011 12:10 PM, Nathan wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Just a quick, mini proposal wrt supporting multiple "named graphs" in
> turtle.
>
> We could add a new keyword and directive, @graph (or @namespace), who's
> value was an IRI. This would be a minimal change to the grammar, for
> example:
>
> @prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
> @prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/> .
> @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .
>
> # default graph
> <http://example.org/bob> dc:publisher "Bob" .
> <http://example.org/alice> dc:publisher "Alice" .
>
> @graph <http://example.org/bob> .
> _:a foaf:name "Bob" .
> _:a foaf:mbox <mailto:bob@oldcorp.example.org> .
>
> @graph <http://example.org/alice> .
> _:a foaf:name "Alice" .
> _:a foaf:mbox <mailto:alice@work.example.org> .
>
> I believe it's pretty self explanatory, so will spare getting in to any
> heavy details, other than a couple of basic questions:
>
> - What would the scope of @prefix and @base declarations be?
> (either no change / file wide, or with a scope of the nearest "@graph")
>
> - Would the value be an IRI, or an absolute-IRI?
> (my own preference would be the latter).
>
> Best,
>
> Nathan
>
>
Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 16:50:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:41 GMT