Hi,
I've been wrapping my head around graphs (reading <http://rdflib.net/store/>) and I'm in a bit of a fog. Given this N3 statement... :chimezie :said {:higherOrderStatements rdf:type :complicated} Would it look like this in TriG? @prefix : <> . @prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> . { :chimezie :said _:G . } _:G :- { :higherOrderStatements rdf:type :complicated . } Now given this SPARQL query... PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> SELECT ?g, ?thing WHERE { GRAPH ?g { ?thing rdf:type ?thingType } } Does this return the higherOrderStatements subject? Some auto-generated node identifier for g? In a 'formula-aware' store is there a distinction between the named graphs and quoted statement? Is there a way to query things inside the 'formula graph'? And last, but not least, given this classic... { ?x a :man } => { ?x a :mortal } . This would seem to me to describe one graph that contains three statements, but I'm at a bit of a loss as to how to translate that into TriG (if it can be done). Now playing fast and loose... :chimezie :said { { ?x a :higherOrderStatement } => { ?x rdf:type :complicated } } :joel :said { { ?x a :rdfGraph } => { ?x rdf:type :complicated } } Would there be a way of finding out who said what kinds of things are complicated? Joel _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@rdflib.net http://rdflib.net/mailman/listinfo/dev
