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

Re: [Graphs] Proposal for Named Graph Semantics

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 17:11:17 +0100
Cc: Alex Hall <alexhall@revelytix.com>, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <8288D534-BEB5-462D-B648-4DAB490DCE7F@cyganiak.de>
To: antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr
On 8 Apr 2011, at 16:32, Antoine Zimmermann wrote:
> This is what Pat called "poking a g-box". Poking a g-box is sometimes HTTP dereferencing the IRI that identifies the g-box. Sometimes, it's just returning what's in the curly brackets in a TriG document. Sometimes it's whatever triples attached to a certain IRI in a Quad file. Sometimes, it's getting the graph represented by a Jena Model in memory.


That's why I'm in favour of defining *only* an abstract syntax that pairs IRI and g-snap, without constraining what the relationship is.

If I give you a TriG document, or tell you about my SPARQL store, I would probably say: “Look, I poked a bunch of g-boxes (via their IRIs), and here's the g-snaps I got from each.”

Received on Friday, 8 April 2011 16:11:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:58 UTC