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

Re: Skolemization and RDF Semantics

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 23:10:23 +0100
Cc: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, "RDF-WG public-rdf-wg@w3.org" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <34F8F1C2-2390-4CB9-B35D-58DAD64732F4@cyganiak.de>
To: danbri@danbri.org
Dan,

“Skolem” is actually a *much* better name than “genid”. The former, people will remember. The latter, not. It's a weird feature that doesn't really relate much to anything that anyone would be likely to be familiar with. That's why an obscure name is fitting. And damn, “skolem” just sounds great!

Best,
Richard
(who knows he'll be overruled by his fellow WG members, all of who name their projects with acronyms that roll off the tongue like a thumbtack! ;-)


On 27 Apr 2011, at 22:20, Dan Brickley wrote:

> On Wednesday, 27 April 2011, Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com> wrote:
>> On 2011-04-27, at 17:51, Richard Cyganiak
>>> Personally I'm a fan of .well-known/skolem :-) Obscure, but once you know what they are, you'll recognize them. genid is too boring. bnode confuses some people.
>> 
>> I think "skolem" is a pretty obscure piece of jargon.
>> 
> 
> Perhaps we should bear in mind that, While obscure, it is currently
> pretty easy to search for.
> 
> If 1000s of linked data servers start adding the word 'skolem' to urls
> about random obscure topics, Skolemisation could become even more
> obscure.
> 
> Not sure I want that on my conscience!
> 
> Genid +1
> Bnode -1
> Skolem -1
> 
> Dan
> 
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2011 22:10:53 GMT

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