- 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