RE: dataset stuff as an extension or optional feature

On Tuesday, June 04, 2013 7:29 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> D1.   We include something like bound semantics [1] and
> blank-node-graph-names in rdf-concepts (and rdf-mt if appropriate),
> with the blank-node-graph-names being optional, as a "SHOULD", with
> Skolemization provided as an alternative.   (I'm not entirely clear
> what the SHOULD applies to, since I don't exactly know what an
> "implementation" of RDF is.     But I think we can handle that)

+1.

There is no doubt that the industry will benefit from having a possible 
point of convergence, which is what a SHOULD provides.

Regards.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group