W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-star@w3.org > February 2020

Re: How is RDF* supposed to work with Linked Data?

From: Olaf Hartig <olaf.hartig@liu.se>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 09:14:32 +0000
To: "public-rdf-star@w3.org" <public-rdf-star@w3.org>
Message-ID: <2020257.BabaRPd0CE@porty3>
On onsdag 5 februari 2020 kl. 18:36:36 CET Holger Knublauch wrote:
> On 5/02/2020 17:46, Olaf Hartig wrote:
> > [...]
> > 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-spa

> rql-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.

I see that. That's why, in addition to the RDF* data model, I also try to 
promote the option to go with a purely syntactic layer first.

> 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.

That's correct indeed.


Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2020 09:14:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 5 February 2020 09:14:46 UTC