- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 18:51:19 +0100
- To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Ryan Levering wrote: > >> My apologies on my lack of clarity. The query is fine in both cases, > >> but in the data listing, the header on the default graphs is "# Default > >> graph", which isn't nearly as clear as, for instance 9.3: "# Named > >> graph: http://example.org/dft.ttl" which is what the query actually > uses > >> for it's default dataset. The point of FROM is that you're using a > >> named graph to specify a default/background graph, so it would be > >> clearer to actually have a name on that graph listing. > >> > >> Ryan Levering > >> > > > OK - I see now. > > > Would an editorial change like: > > > ---- > > # Default graph (stored at http://example.org/foaf/aliceFoaf) > > @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> . > > > _:a foaf:name "Alice" . > > _:a foaf:mbox <mailto:alice@work.example> . > > ---- > > adding something to the comment in the data and retaining the point > it is the > > default graph and not using the term "naming" make it clear? > > > Andy > > > Yep, that would work fine; as long as there's some mention of the URI of > that data, so the query makes more sense. Ok - I'll make the changes then. There wil be a formal response to your email when all the comments have been acted on. > > Ryan > Thanks Andy
Received on Thursday, 8 September 2005 17:52:50 UTC