- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 20:50:09 +0100
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
2009/11/1 Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>: >> 2009/11/1 Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>: >> > So, what should W3C standardize next in the area of RDF, if anything? >> >> Turtle syntax. > > Yeah... Any insights into how to handle the costs of having multiple > syntaxes? Should the expectation be that all RDF consuming software > will handling exactly three syntaxes (RDF/XML, RDFa, and Turtle)? I > guess many systems already do, and compared to the other two, parsing > Turtle is trivial. The costs of having multiple syntaxes? How much has RDF/XML cost? No need for anyone to change their parser design, just make a simple syntax the first thing people see when they look for RDF. It's a bit late in the day I know, but I wish I'd have bugged the SPARQL folks about matching the syntax. Ch -- http://danny.ayers.name
Received on Sunday, 1 November 2009 19:50:49 UTC