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
