- From: Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 07:22:09 +1000
- To: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
- Cc: public-sparql-dev@w3.org
On 5 May 2011 21:57, Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net> wrote: > Dear all, > > I've been concerned with the problems caused by the SPARQL 1.0 concept of what > the graph URI identifies, something I find terribly confusing and if it is > brought to SPARQL 1.1, I think that it will cause much confusion in the years > to come. Rather than send yet another comment, I figured I'll rather post a > question that may help to clearify things. > > The confusion is caused by the formulation in the last paragraph of section > 8.2.2 of the 1.0 query language spec: > http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#namedGraphs > as I have previously commented. With 1.0, it wasn't hard to live with that > confusion, is nothing specified what you should do if it was dereferenced. > You could get around any conflicts by clever use of redirects or something. > Now that the Graph Store HTTP Protocol does attempt to specify what to do, it > changes the game somewhat. > > To me, it seems to boil down to what URI collisions may occur. I would like to > ask, for each of the below triples, given that http://example.org/graph > identifies a graph and returns a 200 when dereferenced, which of these > triples (prefixes omitted for brevity) would introduce a URI collision, and > why or why not? > > <http://example.org/graph> a foaf:PersonalProfileDocument . > <http://example.org/graph> a void:Dataset . > <http://example.org/graph> a owl:Ontology . > <http://example.org/graph> a cc:Work . > > All of these are very common, and I sincerely hope that the answer is "none of > them introduce a URI collision", but in that case, I hope someone can explain > it in clear terms. :-) > > Finally, I also note that is commonly implemented that you can do > SELECT * FROM <file:///home/foo/data.ttl> WHERE { ?s ?p ?o } > In this case, you can say that file:///home/foo/data.ttl identifies a file > without introducing a URI collision, or is this bad practice? If you want to store information about the file, independent of the triples in the file, you could do it in a separate graph that is dedicated to this purpose. A URI collision is then only important if the triples in the file are inconsistent because your added statements are not colocated. Cheers, Peter
Received on Thursday, 5 May 2011 21:22:37 UTC