W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2001

Re: namedNode? in predicate position?

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:27:33 +0100
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
CC: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
Message-ID: <350.999095253@tatooine.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>
>>>jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com said:
> while at next telecon agenda items,
> what about the N-triples/MT related questions
> 1. predicate ::= uriref  versus predicate ::= uriref | namedNode?

Does RDF allow, let's call it, non-URI-ref for predicates?
I don't think so, at present.  In the graph model in the original
M&S, predicates are arrows with URIs, they are never empty circles.

> 2. why do we use the term namedNode for a node which is in fact not named?

It was anonNode - which was probably worse, so I changed it.
How about princeNode?

It is just a token in the N-Triples grammar and if it will reduce any
implied meaning by changing the characters of the token, let's do it.

> ps question 1 is in fact related with the problem to write
>    e.g. the following N-triples
>      <#a> _:x <#d>.
>      _:x <#b> <#c>.
>    in RDF/XML syntax
>    Jeremy/Dave, do you have trouble with that?

Well at present I say it is illegal N-Triples.

Dave
Received on Wednesday, 29 August 2001 10:27:38 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:38:49 EDT