W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2009

XML Syntax

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 20:43:25 +0100
Message-Id: <2FFF4112-4A65-4F1C-8449-DED6031A14C7@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Hi folks,

It seems unlikely (:() that I shall be able to call in tomorrow (I'm  
traveling and -- like the packing incapable person that I really  
really am -- forgot my phone charger.)

I'm trying to make arrangements with my teaching so that I can be on  
the call next week.

I think the idea of an XML (toolchain friendly) Syntax is pretty  
obvious. I don't recall there being active hostility to it last group  
-- basically the champions (Kendall and me) ran out of steam.

Re: RDF syntax. As I wrote before (and I believe on the champion  
page), this won't help with using XML tools or outreach to heavy XML  
users. RDF/XML just doesn't play nice in today's XML world...it *was*  
a pretty early application and it shows.

Manchester doesn't care one way or the other about a triply syntax. I  
will note that the prior working group did reject a triple syntax  
(based on N3) for SPARQL queries (though adopting Turtleishness for  
BGPs). I believe that the debate took place at a Boston F2F with TimBL  
championing the triply syntax, but I was in other group meetings for  
those bits, IIRC. Perhaps Andy or Steve recall more (Lee? were you  
there?)?

Anyway, I don't think that binds us per se, but I do think it's a  
separate issue.

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Monday, 13 April 2009 19:45:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:38 GMT