Re: Reification - whats best practice?

>We thought of that.  But slipping in such a huge change to RDF
>in an existing syntax wasn't where we ended up.
>
>I noticed that Named Graphs extends RDF in at least two ways:
>1) RDF triple subjects can be literals
>2) RDF triples are quads (sic)
>
>so it's really Named non-RDF Graphs.
>
>For reference, RDF triples are defined at
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/#dfn-rdf-triple
>starting "An RDF triple contains three components:"
>  
>

and why can't we change this?

reification syntax is "not practical" as we see above in the thread. So 
why can't we change the RDF spec and add a quad spec, together with a 
RDF/XML and N-3 serialization.

who wants this, too?

Leo