W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2012

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

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 09:02:54 +0200
Cc: W3C RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <472B7A4C-7F44-455D-B507-C47F2A812DE5@w3.org>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>
My problem with this is that it becomes a closed possibility provided by the store, and not the choice of the dataset provider. I mean: the SPARQL service description tells me about the default dataset at the SPARQL endpoint. Is there a way to tell the SPARQL engine to use or not to use the union of the graphs that are in a specific SPARQL query>

What am looking for is a way to tell the system: this is what I want. Do I want a quoting or a union semantics for my particular dataset? 


On Apr 12, 2012, at 22:45 , Andy Seaborne wrote:

> 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:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-service-description/#sd-uniondefaultgraph
> (A TriG syntax shortcut would be nice as well, but not necessary if compatibility with current de facto syntax is deemed more important)
> 	Andy

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Friday, 13 April 2012 07:01:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:04 UTC