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

Re: [Graphs] Proposal for Named Graph Semantics

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 12:27:37 -0400
Message-ID: <4D9F3779.3070000@openlinksw.com>
To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
CC: antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr, Alex Hall <alexhall@revelytix.com>, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 4/8/11 12:11 PM, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> 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.
> +1.
> 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.”
> Best,
> Richard




Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Friday, 8 April 2011 16:28:02 UTC

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