W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > November 2002

Re: Contexts (spinoff from copy and wrap rdf statements)

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 13:04:29 -0800
Message-ID: <3DDD4A5D.3050608@robustai.net>
To: rdfig <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

Bob MacGregor wrote:

 > Finally, models/contexts should be first class entities, i.e., they
 > should be resources. That way, you can make statements about all
 > statements in a context.  That's where the space saving comes from
 > -- if you have 500 statements that all have the same last-modified
 > timestamp and the same author, you can put them into a context that
 > has a single timestamp statement and a single author statement.
 > With reification, you need 500 timestamp statements and 500 author
 > statements.

I totally agree.  I really don't understand why we can't just agree to
refer to the set of triples (the model) encoded by the document at
<urlA> as <urlA#ThisGraph>.   Sure we can do that right now, but it
would be nice if the WG could standardize on some fixed constant  like
"ThisGraph" so that our data would be interoperable.    Why does the WG
seems to think that its reasons for not specifying this are *more
important*  than it is for developers to have some standard way to refer
to a model as a "first class entity" ?

Seth Russell
Received on Thursday, 21 November 2002 16:05:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:57 GMT