Dear Gregg, this is very nice. Slide 5, you might want to mark your JSON-LD example as "not working yet' (AFAIK, the @univar type is not part of the standard, right?) Also, a lot of people are allergic to blank nodes (and some of them even have quite valid arguments...). Proposing to put *more* blank nodes as soon as slide 2 might antagonize those people, who may become less receptive to the remaining of the presentation. Maybe it would be a good idea to forestall this, with a slide between 1 and 2, or may be just an oral warnin, in the line of: " I know that blank nodes can be painful to cope with, but there are solutions: skolemization, correctly defining their scope, etc... Under this premise, I don't consider blank nodes to be taboo." best On Sat, 23 Feb 2019 at 23:51, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote: > The format for the Berlin Data Workshop [1] remains unclear, but I’ve > prepared just a couple of slides to describe one way in which Anonymous > Named Graphs in JSON-LD could support the property graph use case. > > > https://json-ld.org/presentations/JSON-LD-Support-for-Property-Graphs/ < > https://json-ld.org/presentations/JSON-LD-Support-for-Property-Graphs/> > > > There’s a short overview of new things in JSON-LD 1.1, and as a bonus, a > sketch of how Notation3 reasoning might look in JSON-LD. (Hint, we really > only need to invent a way to describe universal variables at the syntax > level; reasoning should be universal based on obvious projections from > Notation 3. The required extensions to RDF Datasets and better description > of reasoning semantics are work to be done elsewhere). > > Gregg Kellogg > gregg@greggkellogg.net > > > [1] https://www.w3.org/Data/events/data-ws-2019/schedule.html > > >Received on Sunday, 24 February 2019 15:57:31 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:18:52 UTC