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

Re: Upcoming wave of quad/namedgraph implementations ,was: Reification - whats best practice?

From: Hamish Harvey <david.harvey@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 13:54:42 +0100
Message-ID: <4141A412.3050909@bristol.ac.uk>
To: Andrew Newman <andrew@tucanatech.com>
CC: www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Andrew Newman wrote:

> The main problem we've had with named graphs is that it can be a pain 
> on a machine that has multiple names or names that change over time.  
> If I create a models based on machine names called 
> "http://192.168.10.1/foo" and then move to another network and 
> suddenly it's "http://10.0.0.42/foo" then all my existing queries stop 
> working.  I now prefer URNs for models not URIs and add a level of 
> indirection between them (I think this has been mentioned before).


Why tie the graph name to a machine? Surely you don't need to go as far 
as URNs to solve this problem?

Hamish
Received on Friday, 10 September 2004 12:54:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:09 GMT