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

Re: namedNode? in predicate position?

From: Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 08:54:56 -0400
To: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
Cc: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20010903085456.A1793@w3.org>
On Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 01:36:42AM -0500, Aaron Swartz wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 29, 2001, at 09:27  AM, Dave Beckett wrote:
> 
> >> 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.
> 
I like the idea of allowing predicates to be princeNodes
because it would eliminate special casing predicates (and simplify 
N-Triples a little).  However, I agree with Dave's position (although
M&S is not explicit on this) and thus have written some apps that 
assume predicates will be URI-refs and not princeNodes.

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

Would you please give an example where this would be useful?
Received on Monday, 3 September 2001 08:54:59 EDT

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