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

Re: RDF-ISSUE-98 (graph-dataset-semantics-unified): Should the semantics of RDF graphs and the semantics of RDF datasets be combined into one unified semantics? [RDF Semantics]

From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:16:02 +0200
Message-ID: <5051DC92.9040709@emse.fr>
To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
ISSUE-98 is not trivial.

My vote at the moment is for not changing the RDF semantics document 
beyond simple updates and having a separate document about dataset 
semantics.

If you or Pat, or anyone else, has a proposal to make a unified 
semantics that does not require rewriting RDF Semantics completely, then 
please put it in the wiki and let us discuss it.


AZ

Le 13/09/2012 14:39, Richard Cyganiak a écrit :
> On 13 Sep 2012, at 13:12, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> We would have to be careful to explain why we then don't have
>> datasets-inside-datasets and "named datasets".
>
> It's a somewhat arbitrary restriction in the abstract syntax that
> makes implementations simpler while still allowing the use cases we
> care most about to be addressed.
>
>> It's not a block to the idea but keeping them separate does make it
>> clearer where the boundary is.
>
> I think that keeping them separate would make the Semantics document
> more complicated. The Semantics document is complicated enough as it
> is. I think making it more complicated to account for a syntactic
> restriction is not a good idea. If writing a semantics that is more
> general than necessary for the abstract syntax turns out to be
> simpler, then readers are better served by the simpler thing, IMO.
>
> A related case here is literals-as-subjects, which is a
> well-motivated restriction that I never would want to remove, but I'd
> prefer if the Semantics document would use a generalized notion of
> RDF graphs that doesn't have the restriction, because that would
> remove probably a page of pointless and hard-to-understand trickery
> that is needed to work around the restriction. At least I personally
> found that a barrier to understanding the document.
>
> Best, Richard
>

-- 
Antoine Zimmermann
ISCOD / LSTI - Institut Henri Fayol
École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Saint-Étienne
158 cours Fauriel
42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2
France
Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 66 03
Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66
http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
Received on Thursday, 13 September 2012 13:16:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:51 GMT