- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 07:11:17 -0400
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 08/23/2012 05:57 AM, Antoine Zimmermann wrote: > > > 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. > > I don't recall hearing that, but it makes sense. >> 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. > I'm not sure you'd need to change the value space. Existing (2004) g-snaps can share bnodes, it's just the way the syntaxes are parsed doesn't currently allow one to indicate that. So, those graphs-in-quotes would have to be parsed as some new kind of thing -- a document-fragments, instead of a document. A little problem, IMHO, not a big one. IMHO we should at some point sketch out this solution and its isomorphism to whatever we settle on. Maybe not actually assign a vocabulary to it, lest people use it and not be interoperable. Alternatively, it might be the way RDF/XML folks play in the named-graph space. (That's a Time Permitting deliverable in our charter.) -- Sandro > > >> >> -- 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 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >
Received on Thursday, 23 August 2012 11:11:23 UTC