Re: Alternative RDF Syntaxes (n3, ...)

> Why not just as defined in
> http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/Primer.html#context
> (logical conjunction of statements)???

Yep, in model.n3, it says:-

<> forall :s, :p, :x, :y, :z .
{ :x :p :y . } log:means { [
                n3:subject :x;
                n3:predicate :p;
                n3:object :y ] a log:Truth}.

n3:context a rdf:Property; rdfs:domain n3:statement;
                rdfs:range n3:StatementSet .

But it doesn't go any further than that, and there are no
relationships stated with RDF. Anyhow, I guess that:-

     { :a :b :c . :x :y :z }

then becomes:-

   [ n3:context
         ([ n3:subject :a;
             n3:predicate :b;
             n3:object :c ],
           [ n3:subject :x;
             n3:predicate :y;
             n3:object :z ]) ] .

Although, you can't have a single context on it's own, only in a
triple.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/model.n3

--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
:Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .