Re: a blank node issue

* [2011-03-02 15:54:15 +0000] Richard Cyganiak <> écrit:

] On 2 Mar 2011, at 14:18, William Waites wrote:
] > maybe some convention or
] > standard for skolemising blank nodes so they can be 
] > referred to might be a good thing?
] There is already a convention/standard for skolemising blank
] nodes: just use a URI instead.

And if I am not the author of the statements but I 
want to consume and manipulate them? Surely you aren't
suggesting getting rid of bnodes completely?

The vendor extensions that I was talking about do 
exactly this. The problem is they do it in different

William Waites                <>        <>
F4B3 39BF E775 CF42 0BAB  3DF0 BE40 A6DF B06F FD45

Received on Wednesday, 2 March 2011 16:22:18 UTC