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

Re: why I don't like default graphs in the DATASET proposal

From: Ian Davis <id@talis.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2011 16:53:41 +0000
Cc: "Pierre-Antoine Champin , public-rdf-wg@w3.org" <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
Message-Id: <-8967333742508944962@unknownmsgid>
To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
On 1 Oct 2011, at 12:27, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote:

> On 30 Sep 2011, at 14:17, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote:
>> But do you have a use case that would be solved by a dataset with
>> default graph, that a dataset *without* default graph would *not* solve?
> 
> Backing up the contents of a SPARQL store as a dump, and loading it into a different SPARQL store.
> 

Where is SPARQL store defined? Do you mean a graph store that you can
only dump using the restrictions of SPARQL?

The reality is that most graph stores have names for all the graphs
but designate one as the unnamed one for the purposes of SPARQL. Much
like they all have hidden identifiers for bnodes.




> Best,
> Richard
Received on Wednesday, 5 October 2011 06:47:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:45 GMT