Re: "DOM" for RDF?

On 04/12/2013 10:42, Armando Stellato wrote:
>>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-api/
>>> Why did it die?
>> Lack of interest:-( There were no real uptake in the idea neither by users
> nor
>> by implementers. It really was heading for a paper-only specification. It
>> seems that this direction was not what the community wanted at large.
> ..though maybe it is just the specific instance which didn't fly
> ...I personally feel the need for a standard Java implementation (as others
> may have for other languages obviously), and whether it is the
> implementation of an abstract interface or not, it would be much welcome,
> instead of seeing various middlewares (Sesame and Jena mostly, but there are
> others) and adapters between them, which are not always guaranteed to be
> updated with the versions of the things they adapt.
I notice that the 1.1 CR [1] lacks a BNF representation of the concepts 
which characterize an RDF graph.  Providing such a formal representation 
would be helpful to systems developers, since it would introduce 
standard naming conventions, and structures, which could be followed in 
whichever programming language was being used for development.  This 
inter-system consistency would, in turn, help application software 
engineers using the systems they create.

Obviously this only applies to the graph model, and not to any 
operations which might be carried out on it (which was my original 
point), but I'm still surprised not to see it (not least because it 
should be a pretty simple beast).

Richard

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/
-- 
*Richard Light*