- From: Georgi Kobilarov <georgi.kobilarov@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:42:18 +0100
- To: "'Steve Harris'" <steve.harris@garlik.com>, "Danny Ayers" <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Semantic Web" <semantic-web@w3.org>
Hi, > >>> * improved support for named graphs - essentially bringing the > >>> constructs included in SPARQL back into RDF core (including support > >>> for named graphs in RDF/XML, done in a manner that would be > >>> backwards-compatible if at all possible) > >> > >> I'm not really sure how that fits all together. If you dereference > >> some URI, > >> and get back a RDF/XML document that includes other named graphs, > >> what then? > >> Surely the grph URI of the document you fetched you be the URI you > >> dereferenced. > > > > That's certainly the elegant intuitive approach. Maybe I'm making the > > mistake of engineering for engineering's sake, but I suspect there is > > a role for multiple graphs in a single document/at a single > > dereferenceable URI (dunno, somehow reflecting default graph/other > > named graphs in SPARQL). > > I don't have any genuine use cases. > > I do, backups (well, restores more importantly) of SPARQL stores. We > use TriG syntax for that. I have another one: triples about one resource aggregated from different data sources, under different licenses. At Uberblic we also use TriG to express that. Cheers, Georgi -- Georgi Kobilarov www.georgikobilarov.com
Received on Thursday, 14 January 2010 22:43:24 UTC