- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 10:18:57 -0400
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
On 7/16/20 9:58 AM, Dan Brickley wrote: > I believe the big appeal of putting it all into the zone we call > "literals" is that you get a kind of atomicity; that chunk of data is > either there, or not there; it is asserted, or not asserted. With a > triples-based (description of a ) data structure you have to be > constantly on your guard that every subset of the full graph pattern is > at least sensible and harmless, even when subsetting these chunks is > often confusing or misleading for data consumers. I can't help wondering > whether notions of graph shapes [ . . . ] could be > exploited to create an RDF-based data format which had atomicity at the > level of entire shapes. +1 IMO the ability to manipulate chunks of data atomically -- arrays, n-ary tuples and hierarchical objects -- is a key requirement in developing a higher-level form of RDF. This will include the need to conveniently construct and deconstruct such chunks in rules or query languages. David Booth
Received on Thursday, 16 July 2020 14:19:11 UTC