- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 09:23:34 -0400
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Cc: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
> ...tech scene is lately abuzz with all kinds of talk of 'graphs':
>
> - the social graph
> - interest graphs
> - graph databases
>
I find this (even without your other message supporting "graph")
entirely compelling, and regret saying anything negative about "graph".
So, that leaves my favorites as:
g-snap: "RDF Graph", or "mathematical RDF Graph" or
"mathematical set of triples" when disambiguation is needed
g-box: "RDF Graph Container"
g-text: "(RDF Graph) Serialization"
But I also agree with Richard that it's much more important to focus on
the meaning, with the use cases and model, than the terms.
(And, many of us expressed at the meeting yesterday, I think a good way
forward on that is to try to address the provenance use cases by working
with the Provenance Working Group, and other SemWeb WGs.)
-- Sandro
Received on Thursday, 21 July 2011 13:58:11 UTC