- From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 12:07:04 +0200
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Pierre-Antoine, Le 22/06/2011 19:19, Pierre-Antoine Champin a écrit : > Hi all, > > after today's telecon, I read the proposal at [1]. > > First, it seems to be a "light" version of the Named Graph paper that > Pat mentionned. "Light", because it specifies that > > "The interpretation of the IRI [paired to graphs], in the RDF Semantics > sense, is left unspecified." > > It is all very well, but what happens when one wants to use those IRIs > *in* the named graphs? As proposed in the 'Semantic Extension' section > of [1]? This section, which I wrote, was put there before we made any decision on what the naming mechanism of graph store means. This section should be considered informative, explaining how the basic semantics can be extended. Such extension /may/ be defined externally to this WG. The semantics is extremely simple and does not make any assumption on what the "name of the graph" means. The graph name is just used as an indice in a family of graphs. > > Stating > > :G1 graph:imports :G2 > > does make some assumption about the meaning of :G1 and :G2 in the RDF > Semantics! More generally, if we want to make graphs first class > citizens of RDF, we need a mean to talk about them, hence we need IRIs > whose interpretation in RDF Semantics is that graph. > > pa > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/RDF-Datasets-Proposal > -- Antoine Zimmermann Researcher at: Laboratoire d'InfoRmatique en Image et Systèmes d'information Database Group 7 Avenue Jean Capelle 69621 Villeurbanne Cedex France Tel: +33(0)4 72 43 61 74 - Fax: +33(0)4 72 43 87 13 Lecturer at: Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon 20 Avenue Albert Einstein 69621 Villeurbanne Cedex France antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2011 10:07:34 UTC