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

Re: Putting metadata in the "default" graph Re: Dataset Syntax - checking for consensus

From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 08:04:28 -0400
Message-ID: <506440CC.8060708@thefigtrees.net>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
CC: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 9/27/2012 7:08 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> On 26/09/12 17:41, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
>> We need to support it for compatibility, but I think it's a mistake to
>> specify that anything important be put in that graph.
> There are two uses cases: you and Steve emphasis the complicated case 
> of multiple graphs collected from many places.
> The simple case is one graph.  For that, making the publisher go 
> through "naming" is just overhead for them.

In the case of one graph, I'd imagine one would use RDF/XML or Turtle or 
what-not and use traditional ways of specifying metadata.

Simple or not, I don't think that a single graph is at all a common use 
case for TriG, and I don't think we should design a TriG metadata 
approach around it.

Received on Thursday, 27 September 2012 12:04:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:07 UTC