Implemented ACTION-326 re SPARQL RDF Datasets vs. RDF 1.1 RDF Datasets.
authorDavid Wood <dwood@zepheira.com>
Tue, 17 Dec 2013 16:30:38 -0500
changeset 1622 09cd5fd32515
parent 1621 3b723ff82954
child 1623 909da76449d9
Implemented ACTION-326 re SPARQL RDF Datasets vs. RDF 1.1 RDF Datasets.
rdf-concepts/index.html
--- a/rdf-concepts/index.html	Tue Dec 17 09:37:03 2013 -0800
+++ b/rdf-concepts/index.html	Tue Dec 17 16:30:38 2013 -0500
@@ -819,9 +819,14 @@
         can avoid interoperability issues by not ascribing importance to
         the presence or absence of empty named graphs.</p>
 
-      <p>Blank nodes as graph names are new.  Existing SPARQL implementations
-        might not accept this new feature for some time, so the use of blank
-        nodes as graph names can cause interoperability problems.
+      <p>SPARQL 1.1 [[SPARQL11-OVERVIEW]] also defines the concept of an RDF
+				Dataset.  The definition of an RDF Dataset in SPARQL 1.1 and this
+				specification differ slightly in that this specification allows RDF
+				Graphs to be identified using either an IRI or a blank node.  SPARQL 1.1
+				Query Language only allows RDF Graphs to be identified using an IRI.
+				Existing SPARQL implementations might not allow blank nodes to be used
+				to identify RDF Graphs for some time, so their use can cause
+				interoperability problems.
         <a href="#section-skolemization">Skolemizing</a> blank nodes used as
         graph names can be used to overcome these interoperability problems.</p>
     </div>