Re: [xml-dev] RDF for unstructured databases, RDF for axiomatic

Uche Ogbuji wrote:

 >I agree that proper context/scopes would be little work to add to core
 >RDF, so I have always wondered: why the complete avoidance of the 
issue >in the specs?

Me too.

 >This is a matter that almost every RDF implementor has had to
 >rediscover  and/or reinvent.  I would think a "standard" in
 >development should take note  of this fact.

I think if we just had a way to refer to a graph by URI in standard RDF,
then different developers could implement context/scope in different
ways internal to their application, but the data would still be
interoperable.  Can you think of anything that you would want to say in
RDF about a scope or context (regardless of what you think those things
are) that could not be said by a RDF triple if you could put the URI of
the scope or context as a subject or object of a predicate ?

Seth Russell