Hi Stuart,

On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Stuart Yeates <[log in to unmask]>

> On 07/10/2014 11:15 AM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
>  Thus:
>>    _:bnode1 a bf:Instance ;
>>       bf:uri _:bnode2 .
>>    _:bnode2 a bf:Identifier ;
>>       bf:identifierValue "" .
>> The first reads as: "There is a resource without an identifier, an
>> Instance, and it has an identifier that's a URI."
> The first should read "There is a resource (which I'm not supplying an
> global identifier for right here), an Instance, and it has an identifier
> that's a URI."

"_:bnode1" is an identifier, it's just a scoped identifier (limited to the
> current dataset / file). Think of it as like a file:/// or a
> http://localhost/ URI; very useful for internal processes and processing,
> but not to be shown in public.

Yes, I was careless with the use of "identifier" :)  I did indeed mean
without a global identifier. is clear that
blank nodes are disjoint from IRIs, and are always locally scoped.  If it
wasn't an identifier /at all/ you couldn't refer to it in the graph.

However I don't think that changes my point that it's very strange to say,
as corrected:

Line 1: There is a resource without a global identifier which is an
Line 2: That resource has a URI which is a resource without a global
Line 3: That second resource is an Identifier.
Line 4: And it has a value of a global identifier, recorded as a string


Rob Sanderson
Technology Collaboration Facilitator
Digital Library Systems and Services
Stanford, CA 94305