This is from the "giving yourself more work" category. It does not address a last call issue and is thus optional. Privately, I've been asked if rdf:nodeID could be allowed on properties so that statements could be reified with a blank node identifier rather than a URI being required. i.e. Presently allowed: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:ex="http://example.org/vocab#"> <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/node"> <ex:foo rdf:ID="abc">foo</ex:foo> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- making the 4 reification triples with reified node with URI <baseURI#abc> <baseURI#abc> rdf:type rdf:Statement . <baseURI#abc> rdf:subject <http://example.org/node> . <baseURI#abc> rdf:predicate <http://example.org/vocab#foo> . <baseURI#abc> rdf:object "foo" . Presently forbidden: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:ex="http://example.org/vocab#"> <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/node"> <ex:foo rdf:nodeID="rei">foo</ex:foo> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- making the 4 reification triples with blank node ID _:abc _:rei rdf:type rdf:Statement . _:rei rdf:subject <http://example.org/node> . _:rei rdf:predicate <http://example.org/vocab#foo> . _:rei rdf:object "foo" . Pros: Flexibility Consistency No need to invent a URI Cons: Another change 3 places to put rdf:nodeID - will this confuse? This would have low syntax doc impact, but would need some minor new words. In terms of implementing, I don't see it as too hard. DaveReceived on Monday, 7 April 2003 10:29:59 EDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:56:53 EDT