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

Re: Comments on RDF Spaces document

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 16:52:57 +0100
Message-ID: <4FC0FC59.4030607@epimorphics.com>
To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org

On 26/05/12 16:19, Ivan Herman wrote:

>>> 3.2 Quad and Quadset
>> Why is this needed? Propose remove.
> I am lukewarm about this, I must say. On the one hand, indeed, we
> could have named graphs (or whatever we call them) defined without
> explicit quads. One the other hand: shouldn't we, somewhere in our
> documents (remember that I look at this document as a 'gathering
> place') define quads? After all, they *are* widely used, and some
> sort of a relationships to named graphs should be defined somewhere.
> So I am not sure myself... But I am not as clear-cut as you are.

I think it can be useful to state what a quad is (maybe "define", maybe 
not), but it is an implementation technique and it is not the only one 
for datasets.

Received on Saturday, 26 May 2012 15:53:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:18 UTC