TF-Graphs

From RDF Working Group Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Participants)
Line 66: Line 66:
* [http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/User:Andy_Seaborne Andy Seaborne]
* [http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/User:Andy_Seaborne Andy Seaborne]
* [[User:Azimmerm|Antoine Zimmermann]]
* [[User:Azimmerm|Antoine Zimmermann]]
 +
* [http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/User:Alexhall Alex Hall]

Revision as of 14:42, 16 March 2011

Contents

Task Force "Graphs"

Use Cases

Member Use Cases for graphs, graph identifiers, etc.

Terminology

Material

Workshop results

Suggestions called "Graph Identification" from Stanford Workshop are reproduced below.

Pros
  • widely used by the community
  • part of SPARQL already
  • numerous use cases
  • clarify confusion in implementation
Cons
  • adds complication and may not solve the issue nevertheless
  • complicates the RDF model (potentially)
  • risks with backward compatibility should be assessed (e.g., syntax)
  • does it need standardization?
Proposals
Technical Issues
  • mutual roles of quads vs. singleton named graphs vs. named graphs
  • extension the RDF(S) semantics?
  • new RDF(S) terms? rdf:Graph, rdf:subGraphOf, rdf:equivalentGraph, etc.
  • syntax (TRIG, INRIA Member submission, Web, Graphs and Semantics , n3)
  • graph inclusion, can named graphs share triples
  • whether blank nodes can be shared among multiple graphs
  • whether blank nodes can be used as graph names
  • named graphs do not fully replace reification
  • how would follow your nose apply to named graphs?
  • relationships to SPARQL
  • effects on the SW stack
  • how does it influence the OWL semantics?

Participants

Personal tools