Re: Turtle implementation report for RDF::Trine

Hi Greg,

We discussed this issue today:


On Apr 17, 2013, at 11:19, Gregory Williams <> wrote:

> On Apr 18, 2013, at 12:13 AM, Andy Seaborne <> 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 16:07:59 UTC