- From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 12:50:04 -0400
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- CC: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Hi Nathan, What would be the benefit of inventing something like this compared to using TriG which is similar in spirit and already in (some) use? Lee On 4/1/2011 12:10 PM, 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). > > Best, > > Nathan > >
Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 16:50:44 UTC