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

Re: Proposing new terms for g-snap and g-text

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 10:55:02 -0400
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <1311173702.2599.121.camel@waldron>
The agenda for today says:

> g-snap: "RDF graph"

I can live with this, but I'd be much happier if we also came up with a
retronymic clarifying expansion, like "(abstract) RDF Graph", or
"(mathematical) RDF Graph" to use when we needed to be sure to exclude
all the loose usages.

> g-box: "RDF graph resource"?

-1 on "resource" -- in RDF, everything is a resource, certainly
including g-snaps.

There's nothing I really like here, but I could live with "graph
container" or "triplestore".

> g-text: <no name>? "RDF graph serialization/representation"?

I'm happy with "RDF graph serialization".    -1 on "representation",
since the representation relationship is so vague and used in so many
other ways in RDF.

     -- Sandro
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2011 14:55:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:44 GMT