Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal from Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider on 2011-10-06 (public-rdf-wg@w3.org from October 2011)

From: Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 06:54:07 -0400
To: <phayes@ihmc.us>
CC: <richard@cyganiak.de>, <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>, <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20111006.065407.2215062170051333896.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Subject: Re: why I don't like named graph IRIs in the DATASET proposal
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 18:05:04 -0500

> 
> On Oct 4, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> 
>> On 2 Oct 2011, at 18:06, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote:
>>> As you stress it, RDF does not dictate which IRI should denote which
>>> resource (including graphs). I don't think I ever suggested to change that.
>>> 
>>> However, RDF dictates that each time I use the same IRI (as a node), it
>>> denotes the same resource.
>> 
>> No, it doesn't.
> 
> Yes, it does. 

Are you sure, Pat, especially formally?

peter

Received on Thursday, 6 October 2011 10:55:16 UTC