Re: Turtle support for Multiple Graphs, suggestion

On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 17:10 +0100, Nathan wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> Just a quick, mini proposal wrt supporting multiple "named graphs" in 
> turtle.
> 
> We could add a new keyword and directive, @graph (or @namespace), who's 
> value was an IRI. This would be a minimal change to the grammar, for 
> example:
> 
> @prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
> @prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/> .
> @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .
> 
> # default graph
>   <http://example.org/bob> dc:publisher "Bob" .
>   <http://example.org/alice> dc:publisher "Alice" .
> 
> @graph <http://example.org/bob> .
>    _:a foaf:name "Bob" .
>    _:a foaf:mbox <mailto:bob@oldcorp.example.org> .
> 
> @graph <http://example.org/alice> .
>    _:a foaf:name "Alice" .
>    _:a foaf:mbox <mailto:alice@work.example.org> .
> 
> I believe it's pretty self explanatory, so will spare getting in to any 
> heavy details, other than a couple of basic questions:
> 
> - What would the scope of @prefix and @base declarations be?
> (either no change / file wide, or with a scope of the nearest "@graph")
> 
> - Would the value be an IRI, or an absolute-IRI?
> (my own preference would be the latter).

I don't really see the advantage over something like:

        <graph> <connector> { ... }.

But really, I think the key question is what is the relationship between
"http://example.org/bob" and those two triples?  (That is, ISSUE-15)
Until we know that, it's hard to know what syntax is appropriate.

Thinking about this reminded me of another GRAPHS issue not raised yet,
so I just raised ISSUE-21, "Can Node-IDs be shared between parts of a
quad/multigraph format?"

   -- Sandro

Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 16:34:48 UTC