- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 11:01:24 -0400
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 09/19/2012 10:58 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote: > On 09/19/2012 10:32 AM, David Wood wrote: >> On Sep 19, 2012, at 10:06, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" >> <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 09/19/2012 10:02 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote: >>>> On 09/19/2012 09:48 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >>>>> I'm not convinced that there is any need to restrict properties >>>>> like sendCorrectionsTo to datasets. >>>>> >>>> How else could you define/document it? In writing the property >>>> documentation, I find myself needing some way to talk about those >>>> intended triples (the ones containing the information that the >>>> corrections are about). Without a dataset or some global relation >>>> underlying dataset semantics, I don't know how to do that. >>>> >>>> -- Sandro >>> You could just say that it is a relation between the name/location >>> of a graph and something else. in a dataset it would be the named >>> graph in that dataset (or not). Elsewhere it would refer to the >>> graph at a location. >> Sandro, are you looking for a URI that you can use as the rdfs:range >> for the property sendCorrectionsTo? > > That might be useful, but it's not my focus. I'm just thinking about > a one-paragraph or one-page explanation of the sendCorrectionsTo > predicate. How could you explain to all the people who might use > this predicate what exactly it means. These are folks who are > releasing data feeds from government agencies, research labs, etc, > etc, and the folks writing software which uses those feeds. They > need to all have the same picture in their heads, more of less, of wh > (This was what I proposed in [1].)at Sorry, errant mouse click. Ignore the bit in parens. - s > sendCorrectionsTo means, in both the common cases and the corner cases. > > I think if the RDF WG lays the right groundwork -- and we've very very > close -- then other people can easily define, document, and begin > using sendCorrectionsTo and a few dozen other very interesting and > very useful predicates. (We might also take a stab at some of them in > a WG Note.) If we don't lay the right groundwork, I'm not sure what > will happen. > > The right groundwork certainly includes a simple definition of > datasets and some terminology around them (maybe the stuff from SPARQL > is fine). It should also help people make sense of situations like > the predicate being used outside of a dataset, or in a named graph in > a dataset vs the default graph. Frankly, I can't quite yet make > sense of those corner cases, with this zero-semantics approach. They > do make sense to me, however, if there's some kind of global relation > between things denoted by graph names and the graphs, so that's the > sort of thing I keep leaning towards. > > -- Sandro > > > >> Regards, >> Dave >> >> >>> peter >>> >>> >> >> > > >
Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2012 15:01:31 UTC