- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 18:36:36 +1000
- To: "public-rdf-star@w3.org" <public-rdf-star@w3.org>
On 5/02/2020 17:46, Olaf Hartig wrote: > On onsdag 5 februari 2020 kl. 09:49:34 CET Holger Knublauch wrote: >> On 5/02/2020 08:40, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: >>> I don't see how RDF* can stay compatible with RDF: >>> A node may be a URI with optional fragment identifier (URI >>> >>> reference, or URIref), a literal, or blank (having no separate form of >>> identification). Properties are URI references. >>> >>> https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#section-URI-Vocabulary >> I share this concern. It is impractical to introduce a completely new >> node type without breaking a lot of code and tools. > In contrast. An advantage of the RDF*/SPARQL* approach is that supporting the > approach in a system does not require the system to be rewritten such that it > covers the RDF* data model internally. Instead, a small wrapper component on > top of the unchanged system internals can do the trick. Such a wrapper may map > RDF* data and SPARQL* queries into RDF and SPARQL by using, for instance, the > RDF reification vocabulary (or any other explicit reification approach). > Alternatively, the wrapper may implement a mapping to the URI reification > approach that you mention. Ok, granted. You are enumerating those two options at the end of http://blog.liu.se/olafhartig/2019/01/10/position-statement-rdf-star-and-sparql-star/ I guess the second option - to change the data model and storage - is what Martynas was referring to, and what I agree doesn't easily work for our scenarios either. OTOH, I agree that using Turtle* and SPARQL* as a syntactic layer is quite feasible and is the approach we are taking too. Needless to say these mapping approaches imply some compromises, e.g. if SPARQL* maps to rdf:Statements then queries need to take care not to accidentally also bump into the "physical" triples (rdf:object etc) that SPARQL* was supposed to hide. Holger > > -Olaf > > >> This is why, at least for the time being, we are using what could be >> considered a hack, encoding triples as URIs: >> >> http://datashapes.org/reification.html#uriReification >> >> No approach is ideal, but this here is the most incremental, realistic >> route for us. The ugly long URIs would typically be hidden, e.g. behind >> a syntax like Turtle* and SPARQL* which we are trying to implement for >> our platform's next major release. >> >> (And yes, whether these long URIs should use namespace prefixes is >> another open question which we may need to revisit). >> >> Holger >
Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2020 08:36:43 UTC