Re: Additions to Agenda tomorrow

On Feb 19, 2013, at 1:04 PM, Manu Sporny wrote:

> This is a request to add the following items to the RDF WG telecon
> Agenda tomorrow:
> 
> 1. Allow blank nodes to be used as graph names. Allow a graph name to
>   be both (IRI, graph), and (blank node, graph).
> 2. Preference-poll: Do blank node identifiers, when used as graph names,
>   denote graphs?
> 3. Preference-poll: Do IRIs, when used as graph names, denote graphs?
> 
> Here are the corresponding proposals:
> 
> PROPOSAL: Allow blank nodes to be used as graph names. Specifically,
> allow associating (IRI, graph) and (blank node, graph) when naming graphs.
> 
> PREFERENCE POLL: Blank nodes, when used as graph names, denote the graph
> that they are paired with.
> 
> PREFERENCE POLL: IRIs, when used as graph names, denote the graph that
> they are paired with.

I believe that the WG has already decided this last one. IRIs, used as graph names, are *not* required to denote the graph that they are paired with. 

However, AFAIKS, none of the arguments for taking that position apply to the previous blank node case.

Pat

> 
> -- manu
> 
> -- 
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
> President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: Aaron Swartz, PaySwarm, and Academic Journals
> http://manu.sporny.org/2013/payswarm-journals/
> 
> 

------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes

Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2013 20:46:07 UTC