- From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
- Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 22:31:52 +0200
- To: public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org
Le 01/07/2024 à 21:42, Peter F. Patel-Schneider a écrit : > On 7/1/24 15:03, Thomas Lörtsch wrote: [...] > > RDF named graphs do indeed have semantics - they are RDF graphs and thus > have all their semantics. I did not follow the conversation on this but I cannot let you say this. RDF named graphs are not RDF graphs, period. RDF named graphs are pairs, and RDF graphs are sets of triples. It is incredible that you make such a sloppy statement (in fact, a plain false statement) when at the same time you request an absolute perfect definition of what the lexical-to-value mapping must be when it comes to rdf:JSON. Moreover, if RDF named graphs have semantics, it is only the semantics that one wants to assign to them. Someone else may assign different semantics and that's not interoperable. This is why the RDF 1.1 Working Group could not agree on the semantics of RDF datasets. Please check again the note that I wrote about Semantics of RDF Datasets [1]. --AZ [1] RDF 1.1: On Semantics of RDF Datasets. W3C Working Group Note 25 February 2014. https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-datasets/ -- Antoine Zimmermann École des Mines de Saint-Étienne 158 cours Fauriel CS 62362 42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2 France Tél:+33(0)4 77 49 97 02 https://www.emse.fr/~zimmermann/
Received on Monday, 1 July 2024 20:32:01 UTC