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

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

From: Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 17:28:07 +0100
To: <seth@robustai.net>, "David Menendez" <zednenem@psualum.com>
Cc: "rdfig" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EBEPLGMHCDOJJJPCFHEFCEDKIJAA.danny666@virgilio.it>


>> At 1:04 PM -0800 2002-11-21, Seth Russell wrote:
>>
>>> 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>.
>>
>>
>> What about graphs that are not encoded by documents with URIs?
>
>Ok, take for example the graph of all RSS items that contain the key
>word phrases "Star Trek", "uiversal translator", and "GroupFormingHere".
>  Granted there is no particular document that encodes that graph at
>2:15 AM on 11/22/2002.  But it is still our intention to find this graph
>and give it a URI so we can talk about it, right?   Is that your
>question?

Hmm - if I want to use my foaf data elsewhere I can presently refer to it
using the URL of a file that contains it. This is the de facto URI for the
graph containing that information. But following the suggestion above,
wouldn't I have to use another URI:

http://somewhere/me.rdf#http://somewhere/me.rdf

Seems a little strange somehow...

(btw, you can add another item to your graph:
http://ideagraph.net/rss/Blogfeed.pl#http://ideagraph.net/rss/Blogfeed.pl
)

Cheers,
Danny.
Received on Friday, 22 November 2002 11:40:33 GMT

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