Hi Mark,
Indeed. Interestingly, this use case was the first one I published as an
example of RDF Forms;
http://www.markbaker.ca/2003/10/UriProxy/
It's then probably not a coincidence that the first iteration of triple pattern
fragments
worked with the RDF Forms vocabulary :-)
Hi Leif,
I’m not sure you meant to do Reply-all. :-)
But a Reply-all from me what said that you exactly have the point.
It is entirely appropriate that more than half the course, or even more, would
be on scripting itself.
And that the students would start from essentially no knowledge - that is
Hi Luca,
I'm wondering however if *form URIs* could themselves be resources
rather than datasets.
Sure, why not. They're just URIs.
For example imagine the example from earlier:
http://bar.com/?subject=http%3A%2F%2Ffoo.com%2Falice a void:Dataset .
http://foo.com/alice #some #data .
On 8/25/14 7:26 AM, Ruben Verborgh wrote:
Hi Luca,
I'm wondering however if*form URIs* could themselves be resources
rather than datasets.
Sure, why not. They're just URIs.
For example imagine the example from earlier:
http://bar.com/?subject=http%3A%2F%2Ffoo.com%2Falice a
On 22 Aug 2014, at 22:43, Ruben Verborgh ruben.verbo...@ugent.be wrote:
Hi Hugh,
Can you tell me id there is a pattern for the uri= style stuff, where you
want everything the service wants to say about the URI, in any position?
The current triple pattern fragments spec does not
bnodes are Semantic Web, but not Linked Data.
If a node doesn't have a universal identifier, it cannot be addressed.
I find this comment strange.
If you mean that I can’t query using a bnode, then sure.
If you mean that I never get any bnodes back as a result of a Linked Data URI
GET, then
One of the advantages of bNodes is that they don't have names so that
people can't add things to them. This is useful in the case of RDF
Collections and in places of the OWL spec where you can use them to say
that 'these things are in the collection' and others can't add to them.
On Mon, Aug
On Aug 25, 2014, at 9:38, Paul Houle ontolo...@gmail.com wrote:
One of the advantages of bNodes is that they don't have names so that people
can't add things to them. This is useful in the case of RDF Collections
Yes, because RDF Collections are collections without identity. But, in many
On 8/25/14 11:17 AM, Ruben Verborgh wrote:
bnodes are Semantic Web, but not Linked Data.
If a node doesn't have a universal identifier, it cannot be addressed.
I find this comment strange.
If you mean that I can’t query using a bnode, then sure.
If you mean that I never get any bnodes back as a
