- From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2013 19:42:52 +0100
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 03/10/13 17:27, Markus Lanthaler wrote: > On Thursday, October 03, 2013 5:53 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote: >> On 03/10/13 16:01, Markus Lanthaler wrote: >>> +1 but... >>> >>> ... as I've just re-read the definition of RDF source in Concepts, it >>> appears that its definition is wrong (or at least inconsistent): >>> >>> We informally use the term RDF source to refer to a persistent yet >>> mutable >>> source or container of RDF graphs. An RDF source is a resource that > may >>> be >>> said to have a state that can change over time. A snapshot of the > state >>> can >>> be expressed as an RDF graph >>> >>> So a RDF source may return*multiple* RDF graphs, i.e., a dataset but at > the >>> same time it is possible to express a snapshot as a*single* RDF*graph*. >> >> I don't read "mutable source or container of RDF graphs." as saying it >> will return all of them, only that it can contain different ones. The >> "snapshot" text seems to make it return one at a time. > > Hmm... I see your point but I still find it very confusing. I quite agree there! > > >> "source or container of [an] RDF graph" (singular) would imply that the >> container state can't chnage over time. > > Why? It would just contain/return a single graph at any time. That doesn't > mean that it always has to contain/return the same graph. One reading of "container of an RDF graph" is that if it contains anything it is one particular graph, i.e. the only change is graph /no graph. Andy > > > -- > Markus Lanthaler > @markuslanthaler > >
Received on Thursday, 3 October 2013 18:43:21 UTC