Re: multiple-graph example in the Primner

On 12/7/13 12:01 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>
>> 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).

I don't dispute the existence of "data sources" I've worked with them 
for eons, in many data access middleware and management related guises. 
My fundamental point is that the RDF spec itself is about structured 
data representation using triples.

RDF builds on the prior approaches to structured data representation by 
way of the following:

1. Use of IRIs for entity denotation
2. Explicit semantics for entity relations.

> To ignore or deny that is more confusing than to acknowledge it, if 
> you want to do anything real with it.

You don't have to ignore "sources"  you simply need to introduce them 
without making the RDF spec confusing by way of conflation i.e., not 
properly separating distinct concerns.

RDF triples (statements) don't exist in thin air, you have to inscribe 
them somewhere. Thus, the fact that "somewhere" exists implies that we 
have a place (location) where the triples have been inscribed.


## Example start ##

## There are RDF concrete syntaxes (e.g., TriG, NQuads) that enable one 
qualify the "source" (external or internal) of RDF triples that 
constitute a dataset.

## The RDF source (aka. Named Graph) qualifier to which no RDF spec 
related abstract semantics *currently apply*.

<>

## The RDF triple (statement) inscribed at the source "referred to" 
above, and to which RDF spec semantics *actually apply*.

{<#s> <#p> <#o>}

## End ##

Conclusion:

We don't need to conflate RDF's abstract semantics (as defined in its 
spec) and concrete syntaxes (e.g. TriG and NQuads notations) that enable 
a particular style of RDF statement inscription e.g., qualifying RDF 
statements "source".

I am confident we can get this expressed in the primer without 
compromising all the hard work put into RDF 1.1.

>
>          -- Sandro 


-- 

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