W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Blank Node Identifiers and RDF Dataset Normalization

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:04:54 +0000
Cc: W3C RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, JSON-LD CG <public-linked-json@w3.org>
Message-Id: <E07753B0-4677-4272-B4CF-49E4FD6B335D@garlik.com>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Hi Manu,

I'm not going to reply at length, because I don't think it's productive, but in summary: I think the source of our disagreement is that you think allowing more things to be document-local will make things less complex, and I think it will make things more complex.

I don't have any definitive proof, just going on experience with various different data models.

- Steve

On 2013-02-24, at 02:48, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:

> On 02/20/2013 01:04 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>> I haven't followed all the discussion about dataset normalization, 
>> and I don't know the algorithm, but toward the end of today's call, 
>> it sounded like the best option may be something like Create A New 
>> URI Scheme.
>> 
>> tag:w3.org,2000:graph:
> 
> Hey Sandro, thank you. This is very helpful and I've turned the
> suggestion into a proposal, more below.
> 
> The discussion during last weeks RDF WG call on allowing blank node
> identifiers for graph names was a bit of a train wreck. I apologize for
> my part in not effectively communicating the situation and the purpose
> for the proposals. It became obvious toward the end of the conversation
> that we were all talking past each other and a different approach would
> have been better. So, let's try this again.
> 
> I have written a fairly lengthy blog post summarizing this issue, why
> it's important, and two paths that can get us through this.
> 
> TL;DR: This blog post argues that the extension of blank node
> identifiers in JSON-LD and RDF for the purposes of identifying
> predicates and naming graphs is important. It is important because it
> simplifies the usage of both technologies for developers. The post also
> provides a less-optimal solution if the RDF Working Group does not allow
> blank node identifiers for predicates and graph names in RDF 1.1.
> 
> http://manu.sporny.org/2013/rdf-identifiers/
> 
> Andy, Steve, Pat, Peter, did I miss anything?
> 
> -- manu
> 
> -- 
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: Aaron Swartz, PaySwarm, and Academic Journals
> http://manu.sporny.org/2013/payswarm-journals/
> 

-- 
Steve Harris
Experian
+44 20 3042 4132
Registered in England and Wales 653331 VAT # 887 1335 93
80 Victoria Street, London, SW1E 5JL
Received on Monday, 25 February 2013 11:05:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:54 GMT