- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 17:15:52 +0100
- To: Yves Raimond <Yves.Raimond@bbc.co.uk>
- CC: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
would it be needed? if we can union instead of merge, then surely we can do intersections, differences and all the rest without a problem? Yves Raimond wrote: > Could we bundle graph diffs in that issue as well? > > Best, > y > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 03:07:20PM +0000, RDF Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >> RDF-ISSUE-17 (graph merge): How are RDF datasets to be merged? [RDF Graphs] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/17 >> >> Raised by: David Wood >> On product: RDF Graphs >> >> The "RDF Semantics" spec defines how to merge two or more RDF graphs, >> the pain is caused by blank nodes, otherwise it's a trivial operation. >> >> The "SPARQL Query Language for RDF" spec defines the notion of RDF >> dataset as a set of "one graph, the default graph, which does not have >> a name, and zero or more named graphs, where each named graph is >> identified by an IRI". >> >> How do we define how to merge RDF datasets? >> >> One obvious answer is we merge all the default graphs and all the >> named graphs with the same IRI using the procedure defined by the "RDF >> Semantics" to merge RDF graphs. >> >> NB: This issue will also relate to the "Cleanup Tasks" product if the RDF Semantics document will need to change in relation to named graphs. >> >> At Talis, within the Talis Platform, we want to enable people to >> easily merge RDF graphs into an RDF dataset and perhaps RDF datasets >> into another RDF dataset. We also want to have these merge happen in >> real-time (i.e. as you add/remove triples from the graphs you update >> all the derived graphs/datasets). >> >> Thanks to Paolo Castagna of Talis for providing input to this issue. >> >> >> >> > > >
Received on Monday, 28 March 2011 16:16:41 UTC