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

Re: Skolemization and RDF Semantics

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:30:08 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTikdA-OeJWKHwtvyOiqbPUYQYgnqRQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 28 April 2011 10:36, Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 27/04/11 22:20, Dan Brickley wrote:

>> Genid +1
>> Bnode -1
>> Skolem -1
>
> I think "genid" is too generic -- "id generation" and URIs from ids, happens
> in other situations like keys in data.

Who is the audience? We're not branding a company or product here, so
usual discussion of messaging and ambiguity might not hold.

The point of the 'wellknown' thing is that the meaning isn't obvious
from reading the word we choose, but can be well documented. So I
don't mind 'genid'. Anything with 'bnode' is a bit weird since these
will be used in URIs. And as others have mentioned, Skolem is by far
the most interesting word (though I fear what we'll do to it's
googlability...).

> A name that is indicates to URI-izing bNodes is my preference.

'xbnode'? Google says it's only been used ~300 times...

Dan

>        Andy
>
>>
>> Dan
>>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 28 April 2011 09:30:36 GMT

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