ISSUE-107: Revised definition of blank nodes

blank-node-definition

Revised definition of blank nodes

State:
CLOSED
Product:
RDF Concepts
Raised by:
Richard Cyganiak
Opened on:
2012-11-07
Description:
This issue covers various proposals for revising the definitions related to blank nodes, in RDF Concepts section 3.4, ranging from editorial comments to major re-writes that introduce new concepts.

== B-Scopes proposal ==

Proposal: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/User:Rcygania2/B-Scopes
Related thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Nov/0207.html

== Pat's editorial proposal ==

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012May/0654.html

"The blank nodes in an RDF graph are drawn from an infinite set. "

This seems a rather odd way to introduce the idea. I know it is formally correct, but it reads (to me) rather jarringly. (Which set? Why that set in particular? Etc..)

Suggest something more like:

"A blank node is a node which has no associated information or structure. In an RDF graph, a blank node represents an 'unknown' entity which may not have a name. In the abstract syntax, we specify only that blank nodes are taken from a fixed infinite set which is disjoint from the set of all IRIs and the set of all literals."


"Given two blank nodes, it is possible to determine whether or not they are the same."

Um. I know I am always being acussed of thinking like a mathematician, but this doesn't make sense as stated. If there are TWO blank nodes, then obviously they aren't the same, because if they were there would only be one of them. I know it is hard to say this without using words like "identity", so I suggest simply omitting this sentence altogether, and rephrase the paragraph as something like

"RDF makes no reference to any internal structure or syntactic form of blank nodes. A blank node is simply a node in an RDF graph which has no label or other structure relevant to its RDF role."
Related Actions Items:
No related actions
Related emails:
  1. Re: Proposed edits for ISSUE-107 - blank nodes (this time with some content) (from antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr on 2013-04-24)
  2. Re: Proposed edits for ISSUE-107 - blank nodes (from gavin@carothers.name on 2013-04-17)
  3. Proposed edits for ISSUE-107 - blank nodes (this time with some content) (from pfpschneider@gmail.com on 2013-04-17)
  4. Proposed edits for ISSUE-107 - blank nodes (from pfpschneider@gmail.com on 2013-04-17)
  5. Re: Agenda for 17 April 2013 (from david@3roundstones.com on 2013-04-15)
  6. Re: Agenda for 17 April 2013 (from pfpschneider@gmail.com on 2013-04-15)
  7. proposal for ISSUE-107 (was Re: [All] Agenda for 3 April 2013) (from pfpschneider@gmail.com on 2013-04-02)
  8. Re: In defence of mathematical notations (Was: Re: blank node scope - ISSUE-107 - resolve as in Semantics - hopefully on 20 March) (from phayes@ihmc.us on 2013-03-14)
  9. In defence of mathematical notations (Was: Re: blank node scope - ISSUE-107 - resolve as in Semantics - hopefully on 20 March) (from antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr on 2013-03-14)
  10. Re: blank node scope - ISSUE-107 - resolve as in Semantics - hopefully on 20 March (from phayes@ihmc.us on 2013-03-13)
  11. Re: blank node scope - ISSUE-107 - resolve as in Semantics - hopefully on 20 March (from antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr on 2013-03-13)
  12. blank node scope - ISSUE-107 - resolve as in Semantics - hopefully on 20 March (from pfpschneider@gmail.com on 2013-03-13)
  13. Re: A different take on b-scopes (ISSUE-107) (from phayes@ihmc.us on 2012-11-24)
  14. Re: A different take on b-scopes (ISSUE-107) (from antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr on 2012-11-24)
  15. Re: A different take on b-scopes (ISSUE-107) (from phayes@ihmc.us on 2012-11-23)
  16. Re: A different take on b-scopes (ISSUE-107) (from richard@cyganiak.de on 2012-11-23)
  17. Re: A different take on b-scopes (ISSUE-107) (from antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr on 2012-11-23)
  18. Re: A different take on b-scopes (ISSUE-107) (from richard@cyganiak.de on 2012-11-22)
  19. Re: A different take on b-scopes (ISSUE-107) (from antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr on 2012-11-22)
  20. A different take on b-scopes (ISSUE-107) (from richard@cyganiak.de on 2012-11-21)
  21. Re: [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com on 2012-11-21)
  22. RDF Concepts draft ready; overview of open issues (from richard@cyganiak.de on 2012-11-21)
  23. Re: [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from phayes@ihmc.us on 2012-11-21)
  24. Re: [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr on 2012-11-21)
  25. Re: [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from phayes@ihmc.us on 2012-11-21)
  26. Re: [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr on 2012-11-21)
  27. Re: [All] Agenda for 21 Nov (from alexhall@revelytix.com on 2012-11-20)
  28. Re: [All] Agenda for 21 Nov (from david@3roundstones.com on 2012-11-20)
  29. Re: [All] Agenda for 21 Nov (from phayes@ihmc.us on 2012-11-16)
  30. Re: [All] Agenda for 21 Nov (from richard@cyganiak.de on 2012-11-16)
  31. Re: [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr on 2012-11-13)
  32. Re: [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from phayes@ihmc.us on 2012-11-12)
  33. Re: [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr on 2012-11-12)
  34. Re: [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from phayes@ihmc.us on 2012-11-12)
  35. Re: [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from richard@cyganiak.de on 2012-11-12)
  36. Re: [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from richard@cyganiak.de on 2012-11-12)
  37. Re: [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr on 2012-11-12)
  38. Re: [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from phayes@ihmc.us on 2012-11-12)
  39. [Concepts] Editorial changes to Blank Nodes (ISSUE-107) (from richard@cyganiak.de on 2012-11-09)
  40. Re: RDF-ISSUE-107 (blank-node-definition): Definition of blank nodes (editorial-ish) [RDF Concepts] (from andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com on 2012-11-07)
  41. RDF-ISSUE-107 (blank-node-definition): Definition of blank nodes (editorial-ish) [RDF Concepts] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2012-11-07)

Related notes:

I believe this is addressed by the changes reported here:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Nov/0135.html

Hence marking PENDINGREVIEW.

Richard Cyganiak, 9 Nov 2012, 15:50:36

Setting to OPEN again after considerable resistance against the updated phrasing.

Richard Cyganiak, 13 Nov 2012, 14:53:23

Refactored the issue to explicitly cover the B-Scopes proposal too

Richard Cyganiak, 21 Nov 2012, 18:47:18

Because other specs use the merge of RDF graphs, a definition needs to be added back into Semantics.

Peter Patel-Schneider, 1 May 2013, 15:24:10

RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-107 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013Apr/0115.html, up until "Note:" (We're not characterizing the relationship to RDF 1.0)
https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/rdf-wg/2013-04-24#resolution_2

David Wood, 7 May 2013, 14:04:14

Display change log ATOM feed


Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>, Chair, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Staff Contacts
Tracker: documentation, (configuration for this group), originally developed by Dean Jackson, is developed and maintained by the Systems Team <w3t-sys@w3.org>.
$Id: 107.html,v 1.1 2014-07-09 12:17:54 carine Exp $