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

Re: Was GraphLiteral, now?

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 16:36:40 +0100
Message-ID: <4DB1A088.30701@webr3.org>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
CC: RDFA Working Group <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Cheers, TripleSet it is for now, it actually reads quite well.

Additionally I've added a note to say: "This interface may be renamed, 
marked as optional or even removed entirely in future revisions of this 
specification."

Best,

Nathan

Ivan Herman wrote:
> I would say a triple set is neutral enough at this point.
> 
> You should still put a note into the document saying that the terminology may change if the RDF WG settles on something...
> 
> Thx
> 
> Ivan
> 
> On Apr 22, 2011, at 17:24 , Nathan wrote:
> 
>> Hi All, Ivan,
>>
>> I'm editing the RDF API document at the minute, and trying to come up with a non offensive but still descriptive name for what was previously called GraphLiteral.
>>
>> Would you be prepared to allow the usage of any of the following:
>> - QuotedGraph
>> - TripleSet
>> - EmbeddedGraph
>>
>> I understand the hesitance to use GraphLiteral, but I'm also hesitant to use G-Box since it's starting to take on new meaning in the RDF WG to refer to a named set of triples which change over time (a Named-G-Box) rather than anonymous "triple container" as was originally intended - thus it could easily end up just being another IRI, or having a required name, both of which are different to this more general concept which is basically just allowing a Graph to sit in one of the triple slots.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Nathan
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 22 April 2011 15:37:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:51 UTC