- From: Mike Smith <msmith@clarkparsia.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 13:40:23 -0400
- To: mak@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de
- Cc: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 06:09, Markus Krötzsch <mak@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de> wrote: > "If you provide xml:base for RDF/XML and OWL/XML syntaxes, you could use @base > in the turtle example. Alternatively your could remove all bases" > > Do you suggest to declare @base even though it is not used? My choice of using > bases, prefixes, entities, and namespaces in each syntactic form was motivated > by making examples as short and similarly looking as possible. If one would > really use @base in Turtle, one would have to write > > <localname> > > where we now write > > :localname > > But the latter is closer to the FS examples and it is also shorter. So @base > could be declared but it would not be the preferred mechanism for abbreviation > anyway. I understand now and think that using the shorter, more FS-like syntax is better. Thanks for the response, I'm satisfied with the current form (i.e., not adding @base). -- Mike Smith Clark & Parsia
Received on Wednesday, 20 May 2009 17:41:03 UTC