On 2012-01-04 16:54, Yrjana Rankka wrote:
On 1/4/12 17:42 , Yrjana Rankka wrote:
On 1/4/12 17:00 , Kingsley Idehen wrote:
Trouble is that there isn't consensus re. this matter.
For instance, one could assume that the URI / IRI of a named graph
resolves to a description of said graph. That wouldn't really imply
all the triples in the named graph :-)
Let's consider this situation:
GRAPH <x>
<s1> <p1> "val1";
<p2> "val2";
<p3> "val3".
GRAPH <metadata>
<x> dc:created "somedate";
dc:modified "someotherdate";
dc:creator "Zaphod Beeblebrox".
A client dereferences <x>
What would you expect to get?
Cheers,
Oops. This was directed towards Frans, not Kingsley ;)
In that case, let me reply :-)
I was not really expecting anything in particular: data, metadata, or
both. The background of my question is that I am trying to use a quad
store, but I do not know how it should behave in this respect. Has
Virtuoso made a decision on the matter?
I can understand the option of returning a description of the graph,
instead of its triples. In that way a named graph would behave like a
data set, which is another collection of triples. I am sure the RDF WG
is fully aware of the pros and cons of all options and I wish them much
wisdom in finding a solution for the problem. For me things have become
clearer. I did not know that the issue is still in debate.
Regards,
Frans
