Re: New abstract for RDF Concepts

I've changed the sentence to:

[[
RDF datasets are used to organize collections of RDF graphs, and comprise a default graph and zero or more named graphs.
]]

Best,
Richard


On 8 Nov 2012, at 14:25, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

> Much better would be:
> 
> RDF datasets comprise a default graph and zero or more named graphs.   The graph names, which are IRIs, can be used in RDF statements.
> 
> 
> On 11/08/2012 08:32 AM, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
>> Peter,
>> 
>> On 8 Nov 2012, at 06:45, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>>>> RDF datasets comprise a default graph and zero or more named graphs, and are used to to express metadata about RDF graphs,
>>> How?
>> By making statements about the graph name.
> What does this have to do with the graph itself?
>> 
>>>> and to organize data by context.
>>> How?
> 
> Ditto.
>> By putting data with different context in different named graphs.
>> 
>>> As far as I can tell just about the only thing that the WG should say about RDF datasets is that they consist of a default graph and zero or more named graphs, and can be used to associate names with graphs.
>> What is wrong with making factual statements about what they are actually used for?
> 
> In the primer, it might be acceptable to be so sloppy, but not, I think, in Concepts.
>> 
>>> If the WG calls out two questionable uses of RDF datasets, then it should also call out all the other, less-questionable uses. Who is volunteering to enumerate all of these?
>> Well, how about you make a start by naming one?
> 
> provenance, merging, sourcing, for starters.
>> 
>> Best,
>> Richard
> 
> peter
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 8 November 2012 16:37:39 UTC