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

On Jul 18, 2012, at 4:42 PM, David Booth wrote:

> 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.

I agree in spades. Continuing the absurd and irrational decision to disallow literals in subject position was the worst decision that the RDF WG has taken so far. 

Pat


>  (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.
> 
> 
> 

------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes

Received on Thursday, 19 July 2012 16:39:49 UTC