- From: Andy Seaborne <andy@seaborne.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 11:05:01 +0000
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
On 10/12/2018 17:04, Franconi Enrico wrote:
> Hi,
> I believe that, in order to properly/correctly solve this issue, SPARQL
> implementations could provide a mean to get for each bnode in a SPARQL
> query answer the data graph node /*bound*/ to it, e.g., for each SPARQL
> query result there could be a table with bindings: <result-bnode,
> data-graph-node>.
>
> IMHO it would be wrong (and not necessary, in this case) to give
> persistent identifiers to bnodes.
> cheers
> --e.
The rules for system identifiers would need to limits on their
persistence (e.g. may change, non-reuse) but instead of dealing with the
cases one-by-one, have one general mechanism and it should be applicable
to network use which means some kind of serialization.
Extend "IRI(bnode)" to be skolemization, for example.
I'd prefer to introduce a separate space for bnode system ids, but
skolemization/distinguished IRIs do seem to cover many uses and are RDF 1.1.
Andy
>
>
>> On 10 Dec 2018, at 17:30, David Booth <david@dbooth.org
>> <mailto:david@dbooth.org>> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/10/18 5:34 AM, Michael Brunnbauer wrote:
>>> I'd really like to see mandatory persistent blank node identifiers in
>>> SPARQL - so I can easily do followup queries for blank nodes from a
>>> SPARQL
>>> result. Is this a big deal? I think some triples stores can already
>>> do this.
>>> Which issue do I upvote to get this?
>>
>> Blank nodes #19:
>> https://github.com/w3c/EasierRDF/issues/19
>>
>> David Booth
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2018 11:05:31 UTC