W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > July 2013

RE: ACTION-278: grammar for TriG

From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2013 09:14:02 -0400
Message-ID: <CANfjZH0+v+uzNzkhgN97dXbQFdQ0T+csGoAZXcwdN7ufHaUwDg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Cc: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Jul 7, 2013 6:25 AM, "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> On Sunday, July 07, 2013 12:50 AM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> > We can be conservative or liberal about what can go the the graph name
> > position:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > I prefer the latter as it encourages the good practice of making
> > assertions about labeled graphs, e.g.
> > [[
> >   [ :utteredBy "Bob" ] { <moon> <madeOf> <greenCheese> }
> > ]]
>
> Me too but under the current semantics those wouldn't be assertions about
> the labeled graph as the graph name doesn't denote the graph. I still find
> that very problematic.

Sandro responded to this in another thread. For bookkeeping purposes, I'd
like to point out that this is not an issue with the proposed grammar but
instead the semantic doc.

> --
> Markus Lanthaler
> @markuslanthaler
>
>
Received on Sunday, 7 July 2013 13:14:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:30 UTC