W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > November 2011

Re: PROV-ISSUE-145 (Tlebo): qualified identifiers may not work well with named graphs [Data Model]

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 10:33:51 -0500
Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <53A254B3-54F8-4AC6-82B9-52E595A733CD@rpi.edu>
To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>

On Nov 10, 2011, at 10:45 AM, Graham Klyne wrote:

> On 07/11/2011 08:57, Luc Moreau wrote:
>> Hence, two different entities could be asserted by two different asserters in
>> different accounts,
>> and both may have chosen the same URI to identify them.
> 
> That would be contradictory at the level of RDF.

+1

> 
> I think any attempt to combine documents with such usage would render the result formally meaningless (or at least fail to formally convey the intended meaning).

An incredible benefit of RDF is that merging documents is a no brainer: mathematical set union.
I'm concerned that all of the DM's account scoping of identifiers prevents us from using this core capability at the RDF level.

Nobody responded to the example at
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/7ef37443dc30/ontology/components/Account/different-accounts-can-include-the-same-entity.ttl

Would a DM'er please tell me if <http://example.org/id/entity/2> is <http://example.org/id/entity/2> in both accounts, or if some awkward scoping mechanism needs to be added?

Thanks,
Tim

> 
> #g
> --

Received on Tuesday, 22 November 2011 15:34:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:51:04 UTC