W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2011

Re: RDF Recommendation Set comments (re agenda for 6th April)

From: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 13:39:08 +0200
Message-ID: <4D9C50DC.6060504@liris.cnrs.fr>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
CC: "nathan@webr3.org" <nathan@webr3.org>, RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 04/06/2011 05:14 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
> We might want to think about incorporating some version of sameAs
> into RDFS, as this seems to be fundamental to linked data and also
> widely misused. Having the real meaning of equality exposed in the
> RDF standard itself might be doing the world a favor. (?)

+1e99

it is a shame to have to rely on OWL to have some notion of equality...

While we are at it, I guess inverseProperty would be a nice addition to
RDFS as well, but this is way less important than incorporating sameAs.

  pa


> 
> Pat
> 
> 
>> 
>> -> Primer - needed if we have well written serialization spec's w/
>> examples and a coherent "core" document? - seems like a large
>> domain w/ 3 syntaxes? (and ties to RDFa, SPARQL etc) - any ties in
>> with RDF API?
>> 
>> -> Serializations -> Turtle -> RDF/XML -> JSON
>> 
>> -> Test Cases - should be per serialization?
>> 
>> - where do "graphs" surface in these specs? - can graphs even be a
>> separate document? - linked data? do we cover or account for it, do
>> a note, anything?
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Nathan
>> 
>> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC
> (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St.
> (850)202 4416   office Pensacola                            (850)202
> 4440   fax FL 32502                              (850)291 0667
> mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2011 11:40:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:41 GMT