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

Re: namedNode? in predicate position?

From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 01:39:35 +0100
To: aswartz@upclink.com
Cc: dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <OFEC9ED028.08848A24-ON41256ABC.00022586@bayer-ag.com>


>>> 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.
>
> Well maybe it's an arrow without a URI.

yes, Aaron!

> I think that princeNodes should be allowed in the predicate
> slot... they're rather useful.

yep
e.g.
  <uri#Mary> _:pn <uri#Dan>.
  _:pn <uri#subPropertyOf> <uri#husband>.
instead of saying
  <uri#Mary> <uri#firstHusband> <uri#Dan>.

> While I'm giving unsolicited advice, I think that a DLG is
> probably not the best way to represent the RDF model... it's
> sort of difficult to picture arrows pointing at other arrows.

and also the other way around, see
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Notation3#Subexpress

--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Sunday, 2 September 2001 19:40:09 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:39:37 EDT