W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > October 2001

Re: RDF graph model limited by RDF/xml 1.0 syntax?

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 08:49:25 -0400
Message-ID: <3BC59555.3020703@mitre.org>
To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@mimesweeper.com>
CC: Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Graham is right as to why we went to graphs.  However, I don't think 
anything *really* allows us to avoid dealing with the scoping issue; 
it's just that how things ought to work seems more intuitive with empty 
nodes.  But we still ought to say what we need to say, and if we do it, 
I suspect pretty much the same text would explain bNodes.

--Frank

Graham Klyne wrote:

> At 09:17 AM 10/10/01 -0400, Art Barstow wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 08:00:32AM -0500, Dan Connolly wrote:
>> > Having thought it over, I think the syntax for the model
>> > theory should be, more or less, n-triples:
>> >
>> > An RDF graph is a set of triples <S, P, O>; each
>> > of S, P, O is a term; a term is either an absolute
>> > URI reference, a bNode, or a literal.
>>
>> +1!
> 
> 
> Having seen some of the confusion that has arisen, I'm sort-of inclined 
> to agree...
> 
>>   This is so simple and elegant that it makes me want to cry
>> with joy!
> 
> 
> ... but I think we should not forget that the graph approach was 
> introduced to avoid the bNode scoping issue.  If bNodes are used, then 
> their scope needs to be clearly stated, and I think that some (probably 
> awkward) text will be needed to explain what happens when two separate 
> documents that happen to use the same bNode names are combined and/or 
> asserted simultaneously.
> 
> #g
> -- 
> 
>> This just leaves us with the problem of how to define and
>> constrain RDF/XML ...
>>


-- 
Frank Manola                   The MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road, MS A345   Bedford, MA 01730-1420
mailto:fmanola@mitre.org       voice: 781-271-8147   FAX: 781-271-875
Received on Thursday, 11 October 2001 08:45:02 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:41:00 EDT