Ah, I misunderstood your use of the word “name” to mean an rdfs:label or something like that.
--- A. Soroka The University of Virginia Library > On Feb 1, 2016, at 7:26 AM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 31/01/16 19:49, A. Soroka wrote: >> I’ve got a question about a remark of Andy’s here: >> https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/123#issuecomment-177246334 >> >> "In the Fuseki case, we want shared datasets descriptions, that is, same >> name, to yield the same dataset." >> >> Wouldn't we rather use actual URIs to refer to dataset descriptions to make >> them coincide? Is the use of names as inverse functional properties to do >> this a historical artifact of the way that assembler RDF evolved, or was >> there some reason to do it this way instead of using something more like >> "same URI = same thing”? >> >> --- >> A. Soroka >> The University of Virginia Library >> > > A name is something that identifies. IFPs are one way but where the "name" > here is the subject of the description (which can be a blank node or URI). > > > fuseki:dataset <#dataset> ; > <#dataset> rdf:type ja:RDFDataset > > > > fuseki:dataset [ rdf:type ja:RDFDataset ; > ... > ] ; > > Andy >
