On 02/22/2010 05:54 AM, Gregory Williams wrote: > On Feb 21, 2010, at 5:29 AM, Michael Hausenblas wrote: > >>> What you pointed at is a property sd:namedGraph. >> >> Well spotted! But I didn't really say: here is the class name. I wanted to >> point out that there is something relevant, likely be part of an upcoming >> standard so one should have it in mind. Sorry for not being explicit enough >> in the first place ;) >> >>> The upcoming SPARQLstandard doesn't define any class for named graphs. >> >> Not yet. Any news from this end, Greg? > > The next draft of the service description document will likely include a named graph class to go along with the property mentioned above. If the modeling in the example section[1] works for the named graphs you're hoping to describe (the named graph pointed to by the sd:namedGraph property), then the new class will probably be what you're after. I wonder if it would owl:equivalentClass the rdfg:Graph. Ontology mapping is important or the main advantage of RDF over XML and such is lost. I guess no W3C standard did that yet. Anyway the RDFG has prior act. I wonder if we as a group of people interested in Semantic Web could come up with etiquette for ontology mapping. Best, Jiri > > Hope that helps. > > thanks, > .greg > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-service-description/#id41794 >
Received on Monday, 22 February 2010 10:52:04 UTC