W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > March 2011

Re: RDF-ISSUE-17 (graph merge): How are RDF datasets to be merged? [RDF Graphs]

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 17:42:37 +0100
Message-ID: <4D90BA7D.6080301@webr3.org>
To: Yves Raimond <Yves.Raimond@bbc.co.uk>
CC: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Yves Raimond wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 05:15:52PM +0100, Nathan wrote:
>> would it be needed? if we can union instead of merge, then surely we
>> can do intersections, differences and all the rest without a
>> problem?
> 
> Indeed! Although the RDF Semantics aleady define a method to merge RDF graphs [1], and that doesn't make it trivial to compute differences of graphs... 
> 
> To be completely honest, I am not sure the definition there makes it easy to understand 'merges' as well (what does 'blank nodes in common' mean for two graphs?) - but maybe I am just missing something.

I was thinking in terms of Pat Hayes' "A modest proposal concerning 
blank nodes." and the rather large follow up threads on both this list, 
and related blank nodes thread on semantic-web mailing list.

Short version: scrap bnodes (from the semantics, doesn't ness. mean 
scrapping existentials) - by doing this, merge and a load of other stuff 
would disappear and make everything from equality through to basic set 
operations easy as pie.
Received on Monday, 28 March 2011 16:43:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:04 UTC