- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:22:29 +0100
- To: public-rdf-comments@w3.org
On 16/07/12 22:11, Dan Brickley wrote:
> I am entirely sat on the fence. I don't feel comfortable turning
> Turtle (and SPARQL too?) into more of a pseudo-English thing. On the
> other hand ...
>
>> >- By allowing a predicate to be used in either direction, it decreases
>> >the motivation for the antipattern define both p and inverse of p for all p.
>> >In other words, of you can write "is child of" you don't need
>> >to define a separate "parent" property.
> ...this is quite persuasive, though note that RDF vocabulary authors
> take more into account than Turtle: if 'rev=' is not considered
> deployable in HTML5+RDFa, they'll still include the inverses.
Specifically on the is..of rather than allowing reverse properties:
I don't like the use of "..is .. of .." -- this pseudo-English is, well,
English-centric.
If a constrained (natural) language approach is desired, then adding
features one by one seems to miss the opportunity for a systematic
approach. So why not a develop comprehensive solution
1/ Layer on top of Turtle or N-triples for now
They are moving to different goals and timescales
2/ Have a comprehensive, prototyped and used system
(that's more than is in N3 where it is just @has,
@is .. @of).
3/ Persuade people it's a "good thing"
4/ Submit to W3C with deployment experience.
Andy
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2012 11:23:00 UTC