- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:33:31 +0000
- To: "public-rdf-wg@w3.org WG" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 2013-02-26, at 18:28, Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com> wrote: > On 2013-02-26, at 17:46, Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com> wrote: > >> Jena users find the default graph concept useful: >> >> 1/ When there is one graph being published >> >> 2/ As the union of the named graphs >> >> 3/ As a single place to put the manifest >> >> Conclusion: you don't have to use it if you don't want to. >> >> (all well worn points) > > Right, if people are genuinely finding it useful, I don't think it's reasonable to ask for it to be removed. > > 1-3 above /could/ be handed perfectly well in other ways, in a pure quad system. However, they weren't. C'est la vie. This is a good illustration of the reason I'm so nervous about incorporating "neat tricks" into our specs without real-world experience of their consequences. It's extremely hard to remove them afterwards, and can take some time for people to realise that they are pain points. - Steve -- Steve Harris Experian +44 20 3042 4132 Registered in England and Wales 653331 VAT # 887 1335 93 80 Victoria Street, London, SW1E 5JL
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2013 18:33:59 UTC