- From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2014 12:05:17 -0400
- To: Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru>
- Cc: semantic-web <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CANfjZH0yL4Z61DA9bPGErNhsBFmj=FBXtQ9joYQvCirLr+LU-Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Jul 5, 2014 5:14 PM, "Victor Porton" <porton@narod.ru> wrote: > > I work on this project: > http://freesoft.portonvictor.org/namespaces.xml > > It involves downloading RDF files from the Web. > > When a "bundle" (for lack of a better word), that is a set of related RDF triples, is incomplete it should be ignored. > > My question, if a bundle is split into several different RDF files, and each part of it is incomplete, should it nevertheless not be ignored if the union of all parts of the bundle is complete? > > A toy example (A, B1, B2, C be namespaces): > > In one file: > > <A> <B1> <C> . > > In an other file: > > <A> <B2> <C> . > > If both B1 and B2 properties are required, should this information be ignored (as incomplete bundles)? or should the information from the two files be merged and thus considered complete? People are encouraged to dream up new governance rules for RDF simply because it offers a new fluidity in merging data. I think that's a bit of a red herring; we incorporate data based on whether it's accurate and informative. RDF itself demands no particular rules with regard to completeness or even accuracy. You may trust one source's assertions about one topic but not another. You have to decide whether it's useful to incorporate the B1 and B2 assertions from different files. That said, if you are experimenting with some sort of validation rules, you may be interested in Shape Expressions and Resource Shapes. > -- > Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org >
Received on Saturday, 5 July 2014 17:11:34 UTC