W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > January 2012

Re: Thinking on Endorsement use case

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 15:16:35 +0000
Message-ID: <4F16E253.5010603@epimorphics.com>
To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org


On 18/01/12 14:05, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> On 18 Jan 2012, at 10:58, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> Do any use cases *require* graph naming, or can they, maybe less
>> conveniently, always be solved with identifying a notional
>> representation (document, graph serialization) obtained from a
>> place (graph container/g-box) at a point time (i.e. an
>> observation).
>
> There are use cases such as “keep inferred triples separate from
> asserted triples in an RDF store” that really seem to require graph
> naming.

Thanks - that is quite a good UC for naming graph values.

> The use cases seem to fall into two groups:
>
> 1. RDF datasets as a cache/archive of collections of graphs obtained
> from other sources
>
> 2. RDF datasets as a way of managing subsets of a larger RDF graph
>
> Maybe it is true that everything in the first group can be handled by
> referring to documents or serializations. But I don't think it's
> possible for the second group.

Useful characterisation.

At the risk of overemphasising "managing", the use of the naming is more 
towards local-application usage, not exclusively though.  A certain 
amount of just "tagging" or "coloring" the graph (the tag may well be a 
proper name, owl:sameValueAs, the graph - it's the degree of importance 
of this I'm exploring) [1]

	Andy

>
> Best, Richard

[1] I'm noting http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#sameAs-def says
"owl:sameAs links an individual to an individual"
Received on Wednesday, 18 January 2012 15:17:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:47 GMT