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

Re: Subjects as Literals, [was Re: The Ordered List Ontology]

From: Ivan Mikhailov <imikhailov@openlinksw.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 16:30:57 +0700
To: Graham Klyne <GK-lists@ninebynine.org>
Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>, Jiří Procházka <ojirio@gmail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1278063057.11759.354.camel@octo.iv.dev.null>
On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 08:50 +0100, Graham Klyne wrote:
> [cc's trimmed]
> 
> I'm with Jeremy here, the problem's economic not technical.
> 
> If we could introduce subjects-as-literals in a way that:
> (a) doesn't invalidate any existing RDF, and
> (b) doesn't permit the generation of RDF/XML that existing applications cannot 
> parse,
> 
> then I think there's a possible way forward.

Yes, there's such a way, more over, it will be just a small subset of a
richer language that is widely used already, so it will require very
little coding.

When there's a need in SPARQL-like extensions, like
subjects-as-literals, there's a straightforward way of serializing data
as SPARQL fragments. Note that in this way not only subjects-as-literals
are available, but even SPARQL 1.1 features like path expressions or
"for each X" expressed as "?X" in an appropriate place of an appropriate
BGP.

Best Regards,

Ivan Mikhailov,
OpenLink Software
http://virtuoso.openlinksw.com
Received on Friday, 2 July 2010 09:33:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:21 UTC