Re: Resolution of: #rdfms-identity-anon-resources

There seem to be no responses to Graham's proposed resolution text, and I assume 
therefore no dissent.  This will be on Friday's telecon agenda.

Brian


Graham Klyne wrote:

> With respect to the issue:
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-identity-anon-resources
> 
> Being a revision of my previous message:
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Aug/0030.html
> 
> And citing the model theory document:
> [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-rdf-mt-20010925/
> 
> I propose the following resolution text:
> 
> [[[
> 1. Resources that are described but not named in an XML serialization 
> (by rdf:ID or rdf:about) are represented in an RDF abstract graph by 
> nodes that do not have any associated URI.  Such nodes, called bNodes 
> (from blank nodes) are thereby distinguishable from other described 
> resource nodes, which do have an associated URI-reference label.
> 
> To directly address the question of the issue:  a so-called anonymous 
> resource has no URI.
> 
> 2. To reflect un-named descriptions in N-triples, local names must be
> introduced (i.e. of the form '_:name').  These names are not URIs, and
> their scope is the N-triples document in which they appear.
> 
> 3. In normal use, the meaning of bNode is to assert the existence of at 
> least one resource which is the subject and/or object of properties as 
> indicated by the graph.  This is covered more formally by the Model 
> Theory [3], section 2.  See also the anonymity lemmas in section 3.2.
> 
> NOTE:  it has been proposed that the RDF graph syntax can be used for 
> form a query, in which bNodes may be interpreted as query variables.  
> This resolution confirms that bNodes can be distinguished from other 
> labelled nodes within the graph syntax, but is silent about if and how 
> the graph syntax might be used to represent a query.
> ]]]
> 
> #g
> 
> 
> ------------
> Graham Klyne
> (GK@ACM.ORG)
>

Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2001 06:39:15 UTC