W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > August 2004

Re: Reification - whats best practice?

From: Chris Bizer <chris@bizer.de>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 17:42:30 +0200
Message-ID: <000701c48b83$4c030720$0f8d2da0@wrz03295>
To: "Alberto Reggiori" <alberto@asemantics.com>
Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Chris Bizer wrote:
>
> >
> > From: "Dave Beckett" <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
> > > > ... and you can even get them quite easily into RDF/XML, simply by
> > > > allowing rdf:about/rdf:ID/rdf:nodeID on the <rdf:RDF> wrapper.
> > > > Although there are some good arguments for a completetly different
> > > > serialization syntax such as TriX...
> > >
> > > We thought of that.  But slipping in such a huge change to RDF
> > > in an existing syntax wasn't where we ended up.
> > >
> > > I noticed that Named Graphs extends RDF in at least two ways:
> > > 1) RDF triple subjects can be literals
> > > 2) RDF triples are quads (sic)
> > >
> > > so it's really Named non-RDF Graphs.
> > >
> >
> > Really?
> >
> > A collection of RDF/XML documents on theWeb map naturally into the
abstract
> > syntax of Named Graphs, by using the first xml:base declaration in the
> > document or the URL from which an RDF/XML file is retrieved as a name
for
> > the graph given by the RDF/XML file.
>
> it could work if you assume your graph-name is a URI - but it might not be
> the case - and you might want eventually reference-by-description to
> those graphs (then the graph might be a bNode)
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0328.html
>

Nice use case. I definitively think DAWG should have something like ?SOURCE
in the query language. The semantic *WEB* is about distributed data
published by many sources and I don't see the point in having a query
langage which can't reflect this.

> or you have a stronger argument about it - i.e. why graphs can not be
bNodes?
>

Actually we don't have an argument but just decided to restrict graph names
to be URIs in order to keep things simple. It might be useful to discuss
about loosening this restriction in the future.

Cheers,

Chris

> cheers
>
> Alberto
>
>
Received on Thursday, 26 August 2004 15:42:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:57 UTC