- From: Peter Crowther <peter.crowther@networkinference.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 20:54:48 -0000
- To: "'Sean B. Palmer'" <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> From: Sean B. Palmer [mailto:sean@mysterylights.com] > > Uh... I thought anonymous nodes were supposed to > > be anonymous? > > Yeah, until someone decided that they should have labels in NTriples. > How else would you say that two nodes within the graph are actually > the same? Then, it's a simple step from there to saying, "I want to be > able to remember the node labels whilst I'm authoring":- > > _:Sean <#forename> "Sean" . > _:Sean <#surname> "Palmer" . > > It doesn't actually matter what you call the bNode (which aren't > blank, and have been renamed, but I still like the term) labels, but > it's nice a nice utility for progams to preserve them if they can. That worries me. Anonymous nodes with arbitrary labels, where you are actively *encouraging* collisions by encouraging developers to use familiar tokens as the labels. How does this work when you load fragments of RDF from two or more sources? Or is this exactly what Sandro was getting at? Anyway, (at least half-seriously) why can't the authoring program annotate the anonymous node with a triple denoting the preferred label of the bNode within the authoring environment? - Peter
Received on Friday, 30 November 2001 15:55:27 UTC