It names the secured graph. Yes the same graph can be named two different
things.
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> Does it name the Graph or the SecuredGraph? looks like the latter to me -
> which makes sense to me if the same graph may in two SecuredGraphs for
> differen
Does it name the Graph or the SecuredGraph? looks like the latter to me
- which makes sense to me if the same graph may in two SecuredGraphs for
different setups.
Andy
On 06/08/15 14:28, Claude Warren wrote:
The permissions code has the requirement that a graph be named, but it does
The permissions code has the requirement that a graph be named, but it does
not store the name in the graph object.
For debugging, you could wrap graphs with a delegating graph implementation
that contains the graph name. This would get the functionality you want
without modifying graph itself.
I would tend to be against having it as an API feature for several reasons:
- Users will assume that this is the one true name of the graph (a graph
could have multiple names)
- Every special graph potentially needs to have some kind of name (what
would the name of a multi-union be?)
- RDF 1.1 p
Yes I can do that. I was wondering whether others have the same
requirement, so that it becomes a general API feature.
Holger
On 8/6/2015 18:31, Rob Vesse wrote:
Is there any reason why you can't just create your own wrapper class
NamedGraph which would hold the extra information and simply p
Is there any reason why you can't just create your own wrapper class
NamedGraph which would hold the extra information and simply place your
actual Graph instances inside these wrappers with the desired names
attached?
Rob
On 06/08/2015 03:04, "Holger Knublauch" wrote:
>toString would be suffic
toString would be sufficient, but there needs to be a way to set this
name when the graph is created. Doesn't need to be persisted, and would
be sufficient for memory graphs.
Holger
On 8/6/2015 10:46, aj...@virginia.edu wrote:
Since this is essentially about debugging, would it suffice to re
Since this is essentially about debugging, would it suffice to require Graph
implementations to provide something in toString() to uniquely identify
themselves, or do you really require user-settable or -accessible labels?
---
A. Soroka
The University of Virginia Library
On Aug 5, 2015, at 8:35
While debugging I often run into cases where I walk through Graph
objects (esp MultiUnions) and don't really know which graphs they are.
Looking at triples is often not sufficient. I wonder whether the Graph
interface (or at least GraphMem etc) could be extended with a String
name field that co
