- From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 12:41:57 -0400
- To: David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>
- CC: W3C RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <50633055.1010508@thefigtrees.net>
On 9/26/2012 12:09 PM, David Wood wrote: > * Some designs for carrying for metadata > > PROPOSED: In our dataset syntax, we'll say that metadata goes in the default graph > +0.5, especially if it can be aligned with SPARQL service descriptions. > > What do existing systems do when importing a TriG file that contains data in the "default" graph? The Anzo store has /no default graph/, and therefore either throws an error or throws away any information in a TriG "default graph". Similarly, all TriG exported from Anzo does not have a default graph /unless /it's the serialization of a SPARQL RDF dataset (which//by definition does have a default graph, of course). I bring this up because I brought up a related thread on public-sparql-dev recently: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sparql-dev/2012JulSep/0025.html In that thread, I asked: """ Do all quad stores / named graph stores include a default graph? If the store that you develop or use does have a default graph, does that graph also have a name (URI)? """ The answers were: Anzo -- no default graph (except ones assembled on the fly for querying). OWLIM -- has a default graph with no URI RDF::Query -- has a default graph with no URI 4store & 5store -- default graph is a view on existing graphs (& therefore, I assume, doesn't exist for purposes of /storing /data) -- uses a "special" named graph for writing default data TDB -- can either have an actual default graph or just use the default graph as a view onto the other named graphs Additionally, there was input from 3 implementers (SteveH, GregW, and Chime) that if they could re-implement their systems they would not include a default/unnamed graph. All of which is to say, I think there's a fair amount of evidence that the "default" or unnamed graph is not consistently used, and perhaps not widely used. We need to support it for compatibility, but I think it's a mistake to specify that anything important be put in that graph. Lee
Received on Wednesday, 26 September 2012 16:42:24 UTC