W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > June 2003

RE: XML Enriched N-Triples (XENT)

From: Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 23:52:54 +0200
To: <rhm@cdepot.net>, <jimbobbs@hotmail.com>, "'Bill de hÓra'" <dehora@eircom.net>, "'Sean B. Palmer'" <sean@mysterylights.com>
Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BKELLDAGKABIOCHDFDBPAEHJDBAA.danny666@virgilio.it>

> Just one observation -- all of the attempts to improve readability have
> used the same strategy: replacing *long* names by *short* names.
> That strategy takes into account the fact that humans can only absorb
> so much at one time, and *shorter is better*.

If you're not a Visual Basic expert then dbgrdQueryResult [1] will probably
be meaningless, whereas some sense can be made of the much longer
dataBoundGridQueryResult. The amount and type of meaning that is required is
also important - you probably don't/shouldn't need to know the type of the
object in practice, so queryResult is probably more appropriate. Yes, this
is shorter, but then so is qr or even x.

In general I suppose it depends a lot on how familiar the symbol is - the
XML acronym whizzes by in a way that Extensible Markup Language doesn't (I
even had to pause there to remember the spelling). The positional pattern of
most triples syntaxes is pretty immediately recognisable : blah blah blah,
<blah> <blah> "blah". or even blah(blah, blah). Tim Bray's RPV looked hard
work to me, in fact it seemed worse than RDF/XML.


(not for those with sensitive dispositions)
Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2003 17:56:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:46 UTC