W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp@w3.org > March 2014

Re: Multiple Named Graph

From: Reto Gmür <reto@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 14:59:56 +0100
Message-ID: <CALvhUEVVw42_K2p5vgtwkSfP-H+96hHgHPBv00uwY6rOgYBiHA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "henry.story@bblfish.net" <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Cc: "public-ldp@w3.org" <public-ldp@w3.org>, public-ldp-wg@w3.org
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:30 PM, henry.story@bblfish.net <
henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:

> So to start from the beginnging again.
> I checked the mentions of "named graph" in the spec.
> In the definitions section:
> [[
> Linked Data Platform RDF Source (LDP-RS)An LDPR<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/default/ldp.html#dfn-linked-data-platform-resource> whose
> state is fully represented in RDF, corresponding to an RDF named graph<http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-named-graph>.
> See also the term RDF Source<http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-rdf-source> from
> [rdf11-concepts<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/default/ldp.html#bib-rdf11-concepts>
> ].
> ]]
> Section 5.1:
> [[
> Alternatively, servers may provide the net worth resource and supporting
> containers in a single response representations. When doing this, a
> preference would be for RDF formats that support multiple named graphs

If as you quote above, the state of an LDPR is fully represented in RDF why
should the preference be to return a format that support multiple named
graphs? The latter suggest the resource can be more completely represented
using more than just RDF which contradicts the first.

It would help to understand your positions if you could state your take on
Sandro's statements/questions.

Received on Tuesday, 25 March 2014 14:00:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:16:37 UTC