W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > August 2012

Re: [TURTLE] Turtle Inverse Properties

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 12:09:49 -0400
Message-ID: <5032614D.8060001@w3.org>
To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
CC: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 08/20/2012 11:37 AM, Steve Harris wrote:
> On 2012-08-20, at 14:20, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>
>> On 8/20/12 8:43 AM, Steve Harris wrote:
>>> Just because I don't write Turtle by hand very often doesn't mean other people shouldn't.
>>>
>>> Though, to be honest I think we (RDF users) either are past that point, or should be. Writing HTML by hand went out of fashion rather quickly when the web took off, but it was critical to getting it there. IMHO.
>>>
>>> - Steve
>> We have to teach RDF by encouraging folks to craft Turtle by hand, as a first step. Making triples visible is the key to
> No we don't. I've taught RDF to a pretty significant number of people now, and I (now) start with a SPARQL database, with pre-written data in it.
>
> Making triples visible is important though.
>
>> this endeavor. Historically, as exemplified by RDF/XML, losing the triple in syntax ultimately loses the plot. IMHO., HTML with RDFa or Micordata embeded don't address this fundamental issue, neither does JSON-LD (which is for JS developers).
>>
>> The value of TimBL's point is best appreciated once there's acceptance of the notion that folks (profile: end-user and/or integrator / tech plumber) will ultimately start the Linked Data journey by crafting Turtle by hand.
> Perhaps - that's not really an argument in favour of is Ö of though, that's an argument for making it as simple to read/write as possible IMHO.
>
> Reversing the direction of a triple is definitely an advanced requirement, and not likely to make Turtle easier for novices to read.
>
> As an evidence point, look at the confusion around @rev in RDFa. e.g. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9356293/in-rdfa-is-it-legal-to-use-the-rev-with-property
>
>> Unlike HTML, crafting Turtle by hand is both useful and extremely practical.
> I don't think there's any difference in the utility. I handcraft about as much HTML as Turtle. My CV is maintained in HTML (with RDFa in it actually) for example.
>

I'm fairly optimistic about the future of turtle in <script> tags.

I'm neutral on Turtle having an inverse property syntax.   I think it 
would be useful, but it would make Turtle a somewhat more confusing 
language.  (Personally, I'm happy for synonyms and inverses of 
properties to spread and be heavily used, but that's another topic.)

I'm confused about the point that people don't write HTML by hand. I 
suppose sometimes Web developers use tools to take some of the drudgery 
out (eg templating languages), but they still have to live and breathe HTML.

As an example, I'll refer to a debate about whether Web *designers* (not 
Web developers) should also live and breathe HTML, or should focus on 
design and let someone else code it up:
http://sixrevisions.com/web_design/should-web-designers-know-html-and-css/ 
Summary: "If youíre a web designer, you should know how to code [CSS and 
HTML]. If you donít, youíre a designer, not a web designer."

      -- Sandro
Received on Monday, 20 August 2012 16:10:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:06 UTC