Re: Toss NTriples -- RDF Reification is all we need (was Re: N3 and N-Triples (was: RDF in HTML: Approaches)

On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, Michael Kifer wrote:
> Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 2002-06-04 3:11, "ext Michael Kifer" <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >>>>>> "SR" == "Seth Russell" <of Mon, 03 Jun 2002 10:35:26 PDT> writes:
> > >
> > >   MK> NTriples can be naturally encoded in XML and exchanged.
> > >
> > >   SR> Is that actually true?   How?
> > >
> > > <triple><subject ...>subj</subject><property>...</property> <object> ...
> > > </object> </triple>
> >
> > Why of course. Why did we not see this before?!
> >
> > We can just use a subset of RDF instead of NTriples:
> >
> > <rdf:RDF ...>
> >    <rdf:Statement>
> >       <rdf:subject rdf:resource="http://foo.com/bar"/>
> >       <rdf:predicate rdf:resource="voc://abc.org/blarrg"/>
> >       <rdf:object rdf:resource="#node12345"/>
> >    </rdf:Statement>
> >    <rdf:Statement>
> >       <rdf:subject rdf:resource="#node12345"/>
> >       <rdf:predicate rdf:resource="voc://abc.org/booga"/>
> >       <rdf:object>Gumby</rdf:object>
> >    </rdf:Statement>
> >    ...
> > </rdf:RDF>
> >
> > I hereby propose we toss NTriples altogether and just use RDF/XML
> > as above for all test cases output.
> >
> > RDF/XML provides all the mechanisms needed to explicitly express
> > the precise triples existing in any RDF graph, as RDF/XML.
> >
> > (not really joking about this, actually ;-)
>
> Neither am I. A fine interchange format. The triples languages are for
> humans; their xml serializations -- for machines.

I suggested this some time back, but concluded it wasn't good for
serializing anon / bNodes without inventing a bunch of extra stuff. Nice
idea though.

Dan