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

Re: Named graphs

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 17:51:04 +0000
Message-ID: <402BBD08.7090608@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Benja Fallenstein <b.fallenstein@gmx.de>
Cc: rdf-i <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>


It will take some time to reply to this one ....

It is intentional that you can include a bnode in multiple graphs in the 
same graphset and it is intended that that has file scope. However that is 
not fully thought through yet. It might turn out to be wrong as we proceed 
with the next stage of the work.

Jeremy






Benja Fallenstein wrote:

> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Jeremy,
> 
> I'm at a bit of a loss as to how graph naming should be represented in
> an actual application that syndicates TriX files from multiple places.
> What if two TriX graphsets describe the same graph, but inconsistently
> (i.e., different sets of triples)?
> 
> It seems necessary to be able to not only say, "B said that C," but
> also, "A said that B said that C."
> 
> Also, I'm confused by your use of bnodes. Your graph naming algorithm
> requires that one bnode can be shared by different graphs in the same
> graphset. That's quite a deviation from the RDF abstract syntax, and
> would require significant changes to implementations, I think. I would
> be more comfortable if you would only use URIs for graphs, and specified
> that <id>foo</id> in one graph in a set is not the same as <id>foo</id>
> in another.
> 
> - - Benja
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQFAK2zDUvR5J6wSKPMRArAEAJ4tj3+LBEUG87mi3pwWQKH55SOqEACeN0YR
> CojVGshQIsoFIuOAY71+Jt0=
> =LiBr
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
Received on Thursday, 12 February 2004 12:53:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:58 UTC