Hi Greg, We discussed this issue today: https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/rdf-wg/2013-04-17#line0105 Regards, Dave -- http://about.me/david_wood On Apr 17, 2013, at 11:19, Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com> wrote: > 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 16:07:59 UTC