- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 16:52:52 +0100
- To: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
(just dropped these in #swig, copying here) RDF is defined/constrained by it's serializations currently, so anything in the model/abstract is in the serializations, so when we discuss things like multiple graphs, graph literals, named graphs, it's done in terms of syntax, when really there is hardly ever a case where you need multiple graphs in the syntax, other than when dumping stores or sets of data, and that ain't RDF. however, behind the interface you need this stuff all the time, but not over the wire, and RDF doesn't handle that. so, perhaps a higher problem is: RDF is defined in terms of on the wire needs, but RDF is used as a data model for working with data behind the interface, and the two have different requirements. if you look at the RDF Graph usecases on the wiki, you'll notice that most of them are about managing or working with data, and people are using the syntax of trig or quads to say what they mean - but only the dumping stores cases actually /require/ having anything in the serialization. Best, Nathan
Received on Thursday, 21 April 2011 15:53:52 UTC