W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-comments@w3.org > July 2012

Re: in...of syntax Re: Turtle Last Call: Request for Review

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:42:04 -0400
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, public-rdf-comments@w3.org, David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1342647724.3486.8448.camel@dbooth-laptop>
On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 22:42 -0500, Pat Hayes wrote:
> On Jul 16, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
[ . . . ]
> > - 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. 
> 
> That is a VERY good argument for it. The others are user convenience
> issues, but this one can have far-reaching effects on deployed linked
> data. 

Agreed, though I must point out that the prohibition against literals as
subjects FORCES this anti-pattern, because RDF statements are not
uniformly invertible.  (And now I'll crawl off to the corner again to
lick my wounds from *that* issue.)


-- 
David Booth, Ph.D.
http://dbooth.org/

Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect those of his employer.
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2012 21:42:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:59:30 UTC