Re: Union or not union for the default graph...

On 12/04/12 21:31, David Wood wrote:
> Hi all,
> Perhaps we should provide a standard way for an RDF system to
> advertise how the default graph. That would be sufficient to plug the
> hole Ivan sees without forking the semantics, wouldn't it?
> Linked Data systems already advertise a lot via VoID. This wouldn't
> require much of an extension and needn't even be normative.

Description (using some kind of meta data language) is much better than
putting in the core architecture.

And the amount of work needed is nice as well:

(A TriG syntax shortcut would be nice as well, but not necessary if 
compatibility with current de facto syntax is deemed more important)


Received on Thursday, 12 April 2012 20:45:49 UTC