- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 21:00:52 -0500
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4EEBF7D4.1090604@openlinksw.com>
On 12/16/11 3:56 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote: > INSERT INTO <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log.rdf> > {?s rdfs:isDefinedBy <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#> . > <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#> > <http://open.vocab.org/terms/defines> ?s . > <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#> a owl:Ontology . > ?s <http://www.w3.org/2007/05/powder-s#describedby> > <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log.rdf>} > FROM <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log.rdf> > WHERE {?s a ?o } Andy, I guess my "SPARQL embellishment" comment threw this contribution off topic a little. I pasted the statement above as part of the discussion about named graphs. The statement is actually SPASQL that works inside our SQL query processor as well as via our SPARQL endpoints. Anyway, here is the gist of the what its about. RDF Resource URL/Address: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log.rdf Ontology URI/Name: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log# Key Predicates: 1. http://www.w3.org/2007/05/powder-s#describedby -- for a relation that associates a URI with the address of a resource that bears the description of its referent 2. rdfs:isDefinedBy -- for associating a Class or Property URI with the URI of the Ontology that defines its referent. When the statement above is executed, the following happens: 1. HTTP GET against origin resource URL: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log.rdf, subject to cache invalidation scheme and pre existence of a named graph with that IRI 2. Additional triples added to the named graph due to missing isDefinedBy and wdrs:describedby relations in the origin resource (g-box) at: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log.rdf . Looking at: http://lod.openlinksw.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2F10%2Fswap%2Flog%23semantics , shows the result of the aforementioned actions. I was hoping this would make the matter of named graphs a little clearer by walking through what's been outlined above. Basically, there's data at a location, its retrieved, and post-processed en route to a final representation of the description of a number of data items / objects / entities. Each endowed with a URI that resolves to the description of the URI's referent. Caveat: Which is the correct relation, bearing in mind Name / Address disambiguation: ?s <http://www.w3.org/2007/05/powder-s#describedby> <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log.rdf> or ?s <http://www.w3.org/2007/05/powder-s#describedby> <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log.rdf#this> . This is the riddle, as I see it. Is there a special case were Name/Address ambiguity is accepted such that object identity and object values can be conflated, I doubt it, but it begs the question. I think: ?s <http://www.w3.org/2007/05/powder-s#describedby> <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log.rdf#this> is the cleaner relation. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder& CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Saturday, 17 December 2011 02:02:12 UTC