- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 11:04:59 +0100
- To: Olaf Hartig <olaf.hartig@liu.se>
- Cc: "public-rdf-star@w3.org" <public-rdf-star@w3.org>, David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Message-ID: <CAK-qy=4eoLz7vteS25du1D29rXikTyDBm5YMznzBkLwvYGukqA@mail.gmail.com>
Quick thought: we could also potentially use rdf* annotations to attach multiple graph edges to a named graph. That feels slightly less heavyweight than classical named graphs, although maybe the difference is trivial? Dan On Fri, 30 Aug 2019, 08:52 Olaf Hartig, <olaf.hartig@liu.se> wrote: > David, > > On torsdag 29 augusti 2019 kl. 14:14:39 CEST David Booth wrote: > > [...] > > My main concerns: > > > > - It must be easy to make statements about an entire graph -- a set of > > triples -- rather than one triple at a time. At present RDF* does not > > allow this, but my understanding is that it could be extended to do so. > > IMO this is critically important. > > I don't see why this would be necessary; I mean, I don't think we need > another > such approach. The approaches that you mention below (named graphs, as a > data > model feature, and the N3 syntax to talk about graphs) already give us the > means to make statements about an entire graph. Therefore, in contrast to > these approaches, RDF* focuses on making statements about individual > triples > (similar to standard RDF reification and edge properties in Property > Graphs). > > Making statements about entire graphs and making statements about > individual > triples are orthogonal issues. Of course, there are use cases in which we > want > to be able to do both within the same dataset. To this end, the concept of > a > named graph may simply be extended to be a pair consisting of an IRI (the > graph name) and an RDF* graph (rather than an RDF graph). Then, it is > possible > to use the IRI to make statements about the graph as a whole, and within > the > graph you may have (nested) RDF* triples to make statements about some > particular triple. > > > - It should be harmonized with other existing mechanisms, such as > > named graphs and N3's ability to talk about graphs. > > Does the approach outlined above (named RDF* graphs) address this concern? > > Olaf > > > > Thanks! > > David Booth > >
Received on Friday, 30 August 2019 10:15:08 UTC