- From: David Menendez <zednenem@psualum.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 17:21:28 -0500
- To: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Cc: "Graham Klyne <gk" <gk@ninebynine.org>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Jos De_Roo writes:
> Using <uri-of-some-set-of-triples> as an example
> was misleading. We normally identify the *document*
> on which the rdf formula is written and so it would
> have been better when I would have used
> <uri-of-some-rdf-document> and then I still think
> that we *call* some-set-of-triples
> <uri-of-some-rdf-document>!log:semantics
Does <uri-of-some-rdf-document> indicate a resource available through
the web? If so, is the assumption that log:semantics may relate the same
resource to different graphs over time?
For example, Alice might post a FOAF profile at
<http://example.com/alice>, leading to this data:
<http://example.com/alice> log:semantics {
_:a rdf:type foaf:Person.
_:a foaf:mbox <mailto:alice@example.com>.
_:a foaf:name "Ailce".
}.
The next day, she fixes the typo, and we get:
<http://example.com/alice> log:semantics {
_:a rdf:type foaf:Person.
_:a foaf:mbox <mailto:alice@example.com>.
_:a foaf:name "Alice".
}.
This means we can't treat <http://example.com/alice>!log:semantics as an
identifier of a specific graph, because it indicates different graphs at
different times.
--
David Menendez <zednenem@psualum.com> <http://www.eyrie.org/~zednenem/>
Received on Monday, 22 December 2003 17:21:06 UTC