Is there any reason why you can't just create your own wrapper class NamedGraph which would hold the extra information and simply place your actual Graph instances inside these wrappers with the desired names attached?
Rob On 06/08/2015 03:04, "Holger Knublauch" <[email protected]> wrote: >toString would be sufficient, but there needs to be a way to set this >name when the graph is created. Doesn't need to be persisted, and would >be sufficient for memory graphs. > >Holger > > >On 8/6/2015 10:46, [email protected] wrote: >> Since this is essentially about debugging, would it suffice to require >>Graph implementations to provide something in toString() to uniquely >>identify themselves, or do you really require user-settable or >>-accessible labels? >> >> --- >> A. Soroka >> The University of Virginia Library >> >> On Aug 5, 2015, at 8:35 PM, Holger Knublauch <[email protected]> >>wrote: >> >>> While debugging I often run into cases where I walk through Graph >>>objects (esp MultiUnions) and don't really know which graphs they are. >>>Looking at triples is often not sufficient. I wonder whether the Graph >>>interface (or at least GraphMem etc) could be extended with a String >>>name field that could be set to identify the graph. Then people could >>>place a backward link to the graph name (or even just a comment) into >>>the Graph object itself upon creation. I welcome other suggestions too, >>>or maybe I am the only one who would find that useful? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Holger >>> >
