At 00:06 24/02/04 +0100, Jos De_Roo wrote: >While at it, I'm still doing well without additional >notation for naming graphs. For the normal case of flat >graphs written in rdf documents with uri's it is quite >obvious for an engine to keep track from where it got a >specific triple. This reminds me of one of those simple ideas that's been kicking around my head for a while, but I don't think I ever expressed... Notation3 (as I understand it) has a simple way of creating named graphs within a document; the idiom I use is: uri :- { <formula> } It would be a small extension, I think, to do something similar with RDF/XML: <rdf:RDF rdf:ID="foo"> : (RDF statements) : </rdf:RDF> or <rdf:RDF rdf:about="uri"> : (RDF statements) : </rdf:RDF> Thus, an RDF element might be treated as a syntax construct for a node that happens to be a graph. Is this conceptually broken in any way I haven't noticed? #g ------------ Graham Klyne For email: http://www.ninebynine.org/#ContactReceived on Tuesday, 24 February 2004 05:31:02 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:48 UTC