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

Are you planning to use the Dataset Semantics?

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 18:16:01 -0400
Message-ID: <50622D21.4030500@w3.org>
To: W3C RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>

As we're talking about Dataset Semantics, I'm wondering who will 
implement reasoners that use them.    I wonder this for two reasons.

1.  We need folks to implement a spec, in order for a spec to become a 
W3C Recommendation [1].    If it doesn't get implemented, it gets stuck 
at Candidate Recommendation.   If it's too tied to the other specs, they 
could all get stuck.  (Fortunately, we can just label the dataset 
semantics text "at risk" in the spec so we can remove it, if necessary, 
and let the other specs proceed.)

2.  Some folks might implement it mostly because they like to be feature 
complete (eg the Jena team, historically) but maybe some other folks 
will implement it because they want to use it for some application.    I 
suggest these people should perhaps be given the strongest weight in the 
Dataset Semantics discussion, if they speak up.    If the proposed 
semantics solve their problem, they're much more likely to 
implement-to-spec and be happy.

For myself, at this point I'm 70% convinced that I can implement all the 
dataset use cases I understand (the ones I enumerated in the Federated 
Phonebook examples, plus SPARQL dump/restore) without any standard 
dataset semantics beyond having a standard place for metadata (eg the 
default graph in trig and the service description graph in SPARQL).

     -- Sandro

[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr#cfr
Received on Tuesday, 25 September 2012 22:16:06 GMT

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