- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 18:28:48 +0000
- To: public-prov-wg@w3.org
On 12/02/2013 13:44, Timothy Lebo wrote: > Luc, > > On Jan 15, 2013, at 5:51 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: > >> Hi Tim, >> >> The prov-o document has several examples with blank nodes. >> Some of them are difficult >> to express in prov-n/prov-xml. >> >> Consider: >> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/5495d990f17b/testcases/provo/prov-o-property-hadUsage-PASS.ttl >> >> The usage has no identifier we can use in the derivation. > > Any identifier will do; you may choose a new one for each bnode you find. > > Not *any* identifier: you have to pick one that almost certainly won;t be used for something else - i.e. a UUID or similar. Use or non-use of blank nodes is something of a religious issue in RDF circles. They can be problematic in some environments, but such environments would be free to allocate UUIDs for themselves. Also, using them can sometimes lead to a proliferation of RDF graph size, but I don't think that would be a problem in the case of examples. Personally, I wouldn't worry about using blank nodes in examples - they are a valid aspect of RDF, and I don't see that changing. #g --
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2013 15:13:04 UTC