Re: motivation for bNodes/existentials in RDF; note for parsers

On Sun, 24 Mar 2002, Dave Beckett wrote:

> >>>Dan Connolly said:
> > Pat, Dave,
>
> <snip />
>
> > Dave, I wonder if the syntax spec should
> > say something about "in the past, RDF
> > parsers have parsed anonymous nodes
> > by generating arbitrary URIs; don't do that;
> > make sure the parser client can tell the
> > URI references from the anonymous nodes".
>
> Good idea; I'll that near in section on identifiers, since I'm
> going to expand that to bullets anyway.  Coming soon somewhere in:
>
>   http://ilrt.org/discovery/2001/07/rdf-syntax-grammar/#section-Identifiers

This was pretty much the same worry as the one I raised this morning about
the serialization text (though going in the opposite direction):

http://ilrt.org/discovery/2001/07/rdf-syntax-grammar/#section-Serialising
[[
The basic approach uses the basic RDF syntax from [RDF-MS].
 *  All blank nodes are assigned arbitrary URIs.
...
]]

BTW I wrote a reply to your msg earlier but crashed my ssh session and
lost it. Short version: none of my comments are urgent enough to delay
publication. Consider them early feedback on the next WD. In particular, I
withdraw my comment re rdf:Description (though I'll continue to not use it
myself).

Dan