- From: bergi <bergi@axolotlfarm.org>
- Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 11:59:22 +0200
- To: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- CC: "public-rdfjs@w3.org" <public-rdfjs@w3.org>
Am 19.10.2014 um 11:22 schrieb ☮ elf Pavlik ☮: >> Dont use bnodes, you are violating axiom 0 of the web (among others!), >> anything of significance should be given a URI. > > Melvin, IMO *sometimes* they do make sense, still all the time > triggering debates: > * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2014Sep/0101.html > * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2014Sep/0106.html > * http://manu.sporny.org/2013/rdf-identifiers/#comment-3369 > > Anyways, once we patch RDF-Ext I can compare equality of graphs with > blank nodes and normalized to JSON-LD, this way I address current state > of things :) Melvin is right and also the RDF-Interfaces API is designed in that way [1]. So it's nothing I can fix in RDF-Ext, because I'm using the RDF-Interfaces function. But if you parse both serializations you could use the rdf-test-utils [2] to compare the graphs. That codes just wraps the JSON-LD graph normalization [3]. If some library translates the blank nodes 1:1 from the parsed file and you build your test on that fact it may break with a new version. So don't to it that way. At the end you will have less problems. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-interfaces/#widl-RDFEnvironment-createBlankNode-BlankNode [2] https://www.npmjs.org/package/rdf-test-utils [3] http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/rdf-graph-normalization/
Received on Sunday, 19 October 2014 09:59:52 UTC