Re: Indicating Skolem Nodes (was Re: AW: {Disarmed} Re: blank nodes (once again))

On 2011-03-26, at 09:09, Steve Harris wrote:
> I get where you're coming from, but I suspect that not being able to dereference is a good thing in some cases.
> If it's a dereferencable URI then you win a load of moral(?) obligations to make them stable and persistent, which is some of the things you're might be trying to get away from when using bNodes.
> I like the UUID prefix, gets round a lot of practical issues.
> <bnode:3dff1ee0-783a-42f4-8d67-4381dd4dd83e:123456> can't be resolved, but you can use it in, for e.g.
> Ignoring for a moment the raft of exciting scope issues that raises :)

A less crazy example is maybe:

It's an exercise for the user to map UUIDs to endpoints, but that feels more practical than a global registry of every skolemised bNode.

- Steve

Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8203
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD

Received on Saturday, 26 March 2011 09:31:51 UTC