- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:04:10 -0400
- To: public-rdf-wg <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Some of us kept talking for a few more hours. Everyone was more-or-less cool with these observations about dereference: 1. If a system successfully dereferences URL "L" and obtains a representation of an RDF graph, then <L> is a GraphContainer. That is, "L" denotes a GraphContainer. Logically, GraphContainer is disjoint from foaf:Person (I think!!) so a document that includes "<> a foaf:Person" is (by this proposal) logically inconsistent with it being served on the Web. 2. So, owl:Ontology heavily overlaps GraphContainer. It might even be a subclass of it. (Many OWL ontologies say "<> a owl:Ontology", where the <> will be resolved to the address the ontologies is fetched from, aka L.) 3. Some GraphContainers, "SerialGraphContainers" are functions mapping from time to RDF Graphs. We can talk about next & previous & current RDF Graphs in a SerialGraphContainer, but not about GraphContainers in general. (cf facebook's api for fetching RDF data, which returns different RDF data depending on your credentials). 4. A ConstantGraphContainer always holds the same RDF Graph. This can be used for when you want to attach a dereferenceable URL to a g-snap. You put it in a ConstantGraphContainer.
Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2011 21:04:13 UTC