Re: multiple-graph example in the Primner

On 12/07/2013 11:55 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> On 12/7/13 10:20 AM, Yves Raimond wrote:
>> On Sat, 2013-12-07 at 07:45 -0500, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>> On 12/7/13 1:27 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> My position:
>>>>>> - There needs to be at least one example triple in the Primer in 
>>>>>> which a graph name is being used. Dropping this completely is for 
>>>>>> the editors a no-go.
>>>> Including such an example is a no-go for me. I will formally object 
>>>> (or protest, or register a dissent, I am not sure of the exact W3C 
>>>> process involved here) if the WG publishes any document which 
>>>> implies that such usage is in any way supported by the RDF 1.1 
>>>> specifications. That is *exactly* the semantic stumbling-point at 
>>>> which we were unable to provide any semantics for datasets. RDF 1.1 
>>>> does NOT imply in any way that the use of a graph-name in an RDF 
>>>> triple can or should be understood to refer to the graph. On the 
>>>> contrary, it explicitly denies the validity of such an assumption.
>>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> RDF is about structured data representation using triples. It isn't
>>> about quads (that's a database/store application implementation
>>> detail). RDF isn't a spec for writing RDF databases/stores, its about
>>> the structured data processed by these kinds of applications.
>>>
>> One of the main new feature of RDF 1.1 is graphs and datasets, so it
>> needs to be introduced in the primer imho. What the example should say
>> or not say is debatable, but I don't think anyone is suggesting not
>> having a multi-graph example in the primer.
>>
>> Yves
>
> I believe there request is for a quad example. If so, it basically 
> leads to the concerns that Pat has raised, repeatedly re., the RDF 
> spec itself.
>
> RDF is about triples, not quads.

I don't agree.   Since before it was even called RDF, it was about 
triples being published on the Web, so there was always a fourth 
implicit element (the URL of the Web page where it appears).    To 
ignore or deny that is more confusing than to acknowledge it, if you 
want to do anything real with it.

          -- Sandro

>
>
> Kingsley
>>
>>> We can't introduce examples that ultimately amount to RDF spec
>>> contradictions and eternal confusions. The primer's fundamental goal
>>> is to be as clear as possible about what RDF is all about. It cannot
>>> become the latest RDF confusion vector for its readers.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Kingsley Idehen
>>> Founder & CEO
>>> OpenLink Software
>>> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>>> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>>> Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
>>> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
>>> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk
>> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and
>> may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless 
>> specifically stated.
>> If you have received it in
>> error, please delete it from your system.
>> Do not use, copy or disclose the
>> information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender
>> immediately.
>> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails
>> sent or received.
>> Further communication will signify your consent to
>> this.
>> -----------------------------
>
>

Received on Saturday, 7 December 2013 17:01:39 UTC