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

Re: Question about literals in subject position

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 09:47:14 +0200
Message-ID: <4AC1BB82.7030500@w3.org>
To: Paul Gearon <gearon@ieee.org>
CC: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>


Paul Gearon wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Birte Glimm
> <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>>> We could change the definition to allow literals as subjects - in order to maintain compatibility absolutely with the Query 1.0 spec, the restriction could be moved into the definition of simple entailment matching, freeing it up for other entailment regimes.
>>>
>>> Query 1.0 notes that the RDF WG knew of no reason not permit them except the syntax issues with RDF/XML.
> 
> I can't recall where I saw this, but didn't the RDF folks consider
> adding them in if a new version of RDF ever happens?

This is certainly one of the issues that a new RDF group would have to
look at.

_However_, and obviously putting the SemWeb Activity Head's hat on, it
is not clear at all in my mind that re-opening an RDF group would be a
good thing. RDF is at the centre of Semantic Web technologies, and
reopening the group _may_ send out a message of instability that the
market does not need. After all, it is only recently that we see this
market to become more stabilized and prospering. (And, yes, I am torn on
this issue and I know there will be disagreement on this...)

We certainly should not expect any change on this subject during the
lifetime of this group.

Ivan

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 07:47:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:08:28 GMT