RE: How to attach a prov graph to an RDF Triple?

Dear Martin,


On Monday, October 23, 2017 2:08 PM, Martin Doerr [mailto:martin@ics.forth.gr] wrote:

> On 10/23/2017 12:10 PM, Svensson, Lars wrote:
>> It is up to implementers to optimize for small, one-triple and large graphs in
>> their code. I think constructs like the "bundle" are good, but should fall under one
>> generic construct. What is needed is a constraint mechanism on NamedGraphs, or
>> however you may call it: As in the Bundle construct, we need to be able to define an
>> entity class which instantiates as a named set of triples contraint to an RDF or OWL
>> subschema.
>> Do you have any suggestion what that class might look like? My imagination fails me
>> here.
> 
> Applications I have are, e.g., defining a class "atmospheric observation", which
> instantiates to
> a graph of facts that can be result of one atmospheric observation. Being that, it could
> only instantiate
> classes and properties specific to this. This could be expressed as a subset of a more
> general ontology,
> containing concepts such as pressure, wind, humidity, cloud formation, space-time,
> lightnings.., but not
> buildings, people etc. INSPIRE, e.g., uses an unconstraint reification construct to
> describe results of observations.
> 
> Similarly, archaeologists and geologists describe stratigraphic relationships, that are
> observed at different times
> at multiple spots and then are consolidated to larger hypotheses about the mostly
> invisible part of the strata
> formations. So, we need a class "stratigraphic observation".

OK, I _think_ I begin to grasp what you mean. But isn't this what RDF data shapes (e. g. SHACL an ShEx) are supposed to solve? I don't quite understand how that would work with named graphs.

Thanks for any insights,

Lars

Received on Tuesday, 24 October 2017 06:51:23 UTC