Re: rdfs:Graph ? comment on http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-dataset and issue 35

On 09/11/2013 06:21 PM, Jeremy J Carroll wrote:
>
> This section defines a vocabulary item rdf:Graph in addition to those 
> in [RDF-SCHEMA].
> This is the class of resources that are RDF graphs. If a resource in 
> this class is identified by an IRI, and that IRI is used to name a 
> graph in a dataset, then within that dataset the resource SHOULD 
> correspond to the named graph.

Does it not follow from this definition that:

    PREFIX : <http://example.org/#>
    PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>
    :g1 :p 1.
    :g1 a rdf:Graph.
    :g2 a rdf:Graph.
    GRAPH :g1 { :a :b :c }
    GRAPH :g2 { :a :b :c }
entails:
    :g2 :p 1.

(assuming the "SHOULD" is taken as something we can count on) ?

I think you actually want the class of gboxes, not gsnaps (aka "RDF 
Graphs" according to the specs), for your use case, since I don't think 
you want/believe this entailment.  That is, you want :g1 and :g2 to 
denote containers or slots or mutable locations for triples, not the 
actually mathematical sets of those triples (which are the same, meaning 
I(:g1)=I(:g2), and thus all properties are the same).

       -- Sandro