- From: Thomas Passin <tpassin@tompassin.net>
- Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2018 13:02:38 -0500
- To: Jiří Procházka <ojirio@gmail.com>, semantic-web@w3.org
> Hi, yes, using a blank node is not like a record in a DB without a > primary key. Say you have a Turtle document: > > :ID123 :name "John" ; :location [ :country :USA ] . > > Which might as well be a table row: > > PersonLocations > | PersonID | Country | > | 123 | USA | > The intention most probably was to express "John is at*a* location in > USA" (which someone might want to refer to or expand on later), not > "There exists one or more locations in USA where John is located", the > latter being what the the Turtle document is actually expressing. > I think blank nodes are misused in overwhelming majority of cases. Not that it matters much here, but I don't see a distinction that leads to "using a blank node is not like a record in a DB without a primary key". In a well-named table, the table name will express something about the purpose of the relations in the table. This will, (or *might*) reduce the guessing ("the intention most probably was ..."). You could bring that intention to a blank node by giving it an appropriate type, but still it wouldn't need an id assigned.
Received on Sunday, 25 November 2018 18:12:15 UTC