W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > February 2010

Re: CURIEs in Turtle

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 17:13:49 +0100
Message-Id: <D9E461A9-9F85-4E50-A393-2A0075B5EF0A@danbri.org>
To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
Cc: Dave Beckett <dave@dajobe.org>, Steven Pemberton <Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl>, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, "pfps@research.bell-labs.com" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>, "sandro@w3.org" <sandro@w3.org>, Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@gmail.com>




On 5 Feb 2010, at 16:58, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org> wrote:

> * Dave Beckett <dave@dajobe.org> [2010-02-04 06:12-0800]
>> (replying to the latest msg in this thread)
>>
>> Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>> ...
>>>
>>> ?s?o:n1.?s2?p2:n2 as a single CURIE
>> ...
>>>
>>> ?s?o:n1. ?s2?p2:n2
>>
>> OK, that's line noise.  Turtle should be readable and this is why  
>> whitespace
>> is a good idea to sometimes mandate or VERY strongly suggest.  The  
>> turtle
>> spec doesn't say that very well and the sparql spec does let you  
>> get away
>> with this.  I'm tempted to make mandatory spaces between components  
>> now.
>
> I don't think there's good ROI on chasing down and eliminating paths
> that could allow unpleasantly terse expression. I'd favor backward-
> compatibility and compatibility with SPARQL instead. I'd say forward-
> compatibility is less of an issue as folks frequently rev their SemWeb
> tools.

Evidence for this optimistic claim?

The Web is littered with partial and half finished implementations of  
W3C specs, some frozen, abandoned or just very slowly in-progress. You  
naturally talk to the more commited and engaged developers more (as do  
I). But there's a lot out there on a different pace.

Cheers

Dan
Received on Friday, 5 February 2010 16:13:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:34 GMT