Re: An alternative RDF

10.07.2014, 17:59, "Pat Hayes" <>:
> On Jul 10, 2014, at 8:17 AM, Victor Porton <> wrote:
>> š10.07.2014, 16:05, "Michael Brunnbauer" <>:
>>> šHello Victor,
>>> šwhen using RDF, you cannot decree that certain entities have to be described
>>> šusing blank nodes. RDF users are free to choose between URIs or blank nodes and
>>> šyour app should be able to cope with both.
>> šMy conclusion from this is that the RDF specification should be changed, so that an application would be able to demand that certain nodes are blank.
> As stated, this requirement does not make sense. How would one specify which node one wanted to be blank? There is no way to describe a single node in a graph one has not yet seen.

It is my Ada code, which checks whether a node is blank.

It should be just sure that my Ada code is capable to do this check.

>> šAnd despite of that it is not already in the RDF standard, it seems that most of implementation already provide support for this: Using an RDF library I can tell which nodes are blank and which are not.
> You can look at nodes and determine which ones are blank nodes, of course. That is part of the RDF syntax.

It is just what I need.

Victor Porton -

Received on Thursday, 10 July 2014 15:06:20 UTC