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

Re: RDF Lists

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 10:46:34 -0700
Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <CECD90BE-4BEB-4FCB-B840-2D4A741189A5@garlik.com>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
On 4 May 2012, at 17:25, Sandro Hawke wrote:

> On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 10:08 -0400, Manu Sporny wrote:
>> On 05/04/2012 03:47 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>> On 04/05/12 05:11, Manu Sporny wrote:
>>>> In summary - RDF Lists are difficult to implement, even for people
>>>> that know quite a bit about RDF. They are fantastically difficult
>>>> to grasp for Web developers. They are really hard to author in many
>>>> of the RDF syntaxes.
>>> 
>>> but not Turtle :-) and your other messages suggests Turtle
>>> everywhere.
>> 
>> Yes, TURTLE got it right. :)
>> 
>>>> I'd like to propose something that the group should seriously
>>>> consider:
>>>> 
>>>> 1. Add lists as a first-class citizen for all RDF serializations -
>>>> deprecate all serializations that don't support lists as
>>>> first-class citizens.
>>> 
>>> This is the only complete solution -- anything that encodes in
>>> triples means that the triples view will show through to developers.
>> 
>> Yes, to be more precise, an object can  now be:
>> 
>> * a plain literal (with optional language)
>> * a typed literal
>> * an IRI
>> * a list (with optional type)
> 
> My proposal was that for RDF 1.1 we highlight the notion of a
> "Well-Formed List" as a list that can be losslessly serialized in
> Turtle, and suggest that Best Practice is to use Well-Formed Lists in
> preference to all the other RDF list/collection/container mechanisms. 
> This seems to me be a good transitional stage.

I don't agree with this view, I think lists (well formed or not) are just a pain point in RDF.

> Personally, I think we should put all that other stuff on notice that it
> might go away in RDF 2.0, but I'm not sure we can get consensus on that.

We'd rather lose Lists, and keep Sequences, if it came to a (hypothetical) crunch.

IMHO, the only real solution is a first-class "vector"* literal.

- Steve

* we seem to have used up many of the other names for ordered lists :-/

-- 
Steve Harris, CTO
Garlik, a part of Experian 
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8203  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 653331 VAT # 887 1335 93
Registered office: Landmark House, Experian Way, NG2 Business Park, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, England NG80 1ZZ
Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2012 17:47:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:48 GMT