W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > June 2002

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

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 14:40:12 +0300
To: ext Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
CC: RDF Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B92281CC.16103%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>

On 2002-06-04 13:50, "ext Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org> wrote:

> 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.

Perhaps the idea should have been explored further at the time.

I'm not sure what "extra stuff" might be needed that's not
already in the examples I posted.

Of course, in the context of N-Triples, blank nodes and anonymous
nodes are neither blank nor anonymous ;-)

Cheers, 

Patrick 

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2002 07:37:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:54 GMT