- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 00:19:37 +0900
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-comments@w3.org
On Apr 18, 2013, at 12:13 AM, Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com> wrote: >> The user time question you raised is exemplified in the case where >> someone is copying prefixes from a SPARQL query. I would argue that >> ideally, we'd see one popular representation for prefix (and base) >> declarations and it would be compatible with SPARQL (fixing the '@'s >> and '.'s is frustrating for many users). The big question is how >> reallistic is it that we can migrate there from our current >> widely-deployed '@' directives and how can we balance short-term and >> long-term interests. > > I'm not convinced there is a major need to align prefixes. I see it > more as a historical artifact. If the community, want it fine; there opinions expressed for and against. Agreed. > > But - an observation - > > for those goals, one step would be to make '.' optional in the > @prefix/@base forms. That was my original suggestion (in the case where both syntaxes were supported), and the thing I was hoping to see discussion on. Thanks, Andy. .greg
Received on Wednesday, 17 April 2013 15:20:02 UTC