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

Re: (proposal) was Re: defn of Named Graph

From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 08:56:46 +0100
Message-ID: <52453A3E.5060909@apache.org>
To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Overall, a discussion note would be good.

On 26/09/13 20:02, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> We have two levels of specs, right?  There are the ones that are
> thoroughly reviewed and proven to be implentable, which we call
> Recommendations.

The terminology "named graph" is in use in RECs and RECs-to-be. 
Redefining terminology might be appealing in the short term but I feel 
only leads to confusion long term.

Each named graph is a pair consisting of an IRI or a blank node (the
graph name), and an RDF graph.

and in JSON-LD (sec 7, Data Model)
and in SPARQL (sec 12.1.2)

Received on Friday, 27 September 2013 07:57:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:32 UTC