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

Re: Show me the money - (was Subjects as Literals)

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 18:33:37 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTimtfV0jmY8y1p1G-GU990Uv1VLPAkvPlZnEmdGl@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: nathan@webr3.org, Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>, Yves Raimond <yves.raimond@gmail.com>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>, Story Henry <henry.story@bblfish.net>, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, Ivan Mikhailov <imikhailov@openlinksw.com>
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 17:10 +0100, Nathan wrote:
>> In all honesty, if this doesn't happen, I personally will have no choice
>> but to move to N3 for the bulk of things, and hope for other
>> serializations of N3 to come along.
>
> RIF (which became a W3C Recommendation last week) is N3, mutated (in
> some good ways and some bad ways, I suppose) by the community consensus
> process.   RIF is simultaneously the heir to N3 and a standard business
> rules format.
>
> RIF's central syntax is XML-based, but there's room for a presentation
> syntax that looks like N3.   RIF includes triples which can have
> literals as subject, of course.  (In RIF, these triples are called
> "frames".   Well, sets of triples with a shared subject are called
> frames, technically.    But they are defined by the spec to be an
> extension of RDF triples.)

Excellent, so there's no need to mess with RDF itself for a while? We
can let RIF settle in for a couple years and see how it shapes up
against people's RDFCore 2.0 aspirations?

Dan
Received on Thursday, 1 July 2010 16:34:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:20 UTC