rdf:list vocabulary

• From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
• Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 18:26:00 -0400
• To: OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
• Message-Id: <7D0FC494-B3BF-459A-85E4-AAAA15F5113A@gmail.com>

I'm wondering whether we should consider removing our reliance on  
rdf:list vocabulary for the serialization of OWL and instead make it  
available for modeling in OWL. This would enable a class of RDF that  
is currently inaccessible for reasoning in OWL to be productively  
used. The downside is that we lose some the (relative) conciseness of  
using rdf:parsetype=collection in our RDF serializations.

Given the choice of making the RDF more compact, versus making more  
native RDF possible to reason over using OWL, I think I'd lean to the  
latter. After all, we will have the OWL XML syntax if length of  
serialization is our primary concern.

Thoughts?

-Alan

Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2008 22:26:44 UTC