- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:11:30 +0100
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 2011-07-20, at 15:55, Sandro Hawke wrote: > The agenda for today says: > >> g-snap: "RDF graph" > > I can live with this, but I'd be much happier if we also came up with a > retronymic clarifying expansion, like "(abstract) RDF Graph", or > "(mathematical) RDF Graph" to use when we needed to be sure to exclude > all the loose usages. Agreed. >> g-box: "RDF graph resource"? > > -1 on "resource" -- in RDF, everything is a resource, certainly > including g-snaps. > > There's nothing I really like here, but I could live with "graph > container" or "triplestore". "Triplestore" is often loosely used to also mean quad store, or named-graph store, so it's maybe not ideal. >> g-text: <no name>? "RDF graph serialization/representation"? > > I'm happy with "RDF graph serialization". -1 on "representation", > since the representation relationship is so vague and used in so many > other ways in RDF. Agreed. - Steve -- Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK +44 20 8439 8203 http://www.garlik.com/ Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11 Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2011 15:12:12 UTC