Re: RDF dataset semantics again

Le 22/08/2012 18:37, Sandro Hawke a écrit :
> On 08/22/2012 12:30 PM, Antoine Zimmermann wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I could live with it if there were a syntactic sugar, probably involving
>>> curly braces. :-)
>>
>> Yes, the syntax is not really practical.
>>
>
> Indeed. But, yes, it's a nice way to think about the semantics. I
> understood it to be a way the WG was not okay with.


My impression was that the group found the idea reasonable, possibly 
appealing, but due to a total absence of implementation of this 
solution, and no experience with it thereby, it was not a good idea to 
standardise such a thing.


> One bit that doesn't quite work is that some of the use cases require
> blank nodes to be shared between named graphs. That would be rather
> strange with this literal-strings model.


It is in principle possible to define the datatype such that the value 
space is not exactly the set of RDF Graphs, but rather "RDF Graphs where 
some bnodes can be labelled". The bnode labels are made disjoint from 
URIs, so they can be distinguished apart from normal names, but they 
would not be purely local to the graph.



>
> -- Sandro
>
>>>
>>> - s
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Another (uglier!) representation would be
>>>>> <g> ex:hasGraph
>>>>> <data:text/turtle;charset=UTF-8,%3Cs%3E%20%3Cp%3E%20%3Co%3E> .
>>>>>
>>>>> Which would also allow you to make statements about the quoted graph
>>>>> <data:text/turtle;charset=UTF-8,%3Cs%3E%20%3Cp%3E%20%3Co%3E> dc:date
>>>>> "2012-08-22T14:29:23Z"^^xsd:dateTime .
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> - Steve
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

-- 
Antoine Zimmermann
ISCOD / LSTI - Institut Henri Fayol
École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Saint-Étienne
158 cours Fauriel
42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2
France
Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 66 03
Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66
http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/

Received on Thursday, 23 August 2012 09:57:46 UTC