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

TriG and default graphs

From: Yves Raimond <Yves.Raimond@bbc.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 17:29:59 +0100
To: <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20121024162959.GA7878@june>
´╗┐Hello!

Just jumping on the last point that was mentioned in today's telecon, about possibly not providing any statements about what to do with a TriG default graph. I have the feeling that not doing that actually defeats the point of having a default graph at all. 

If we can't get to an agreement on that first point, I'd really like to understand what the rationale is behind supporting default graphs in TriG, apart from backward-compatibility. When used at the BBC, default graphs have proven to be a very confusing feature, and not having any statement on what do with them would only add to the confusion. 

All the dataset metadata that is supposed to go in that default graph could perfectly go in another named graph, e.g. identified by the URI of the sd:Dataset in the SPARQL end-point you're generating a TriG dump from, or the URI of the TriG file itself. Personally, I'd favour a 'flat' version of TriG, where everything is a named graph.

Best,
Yves


-----------------------------
http://www.bbc.co.uk
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and 
may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in 
error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the 
information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender 
immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails 
sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to 
this.
-----------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:35:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:52 GMT