Re: reified statements in Turtle

eric…thank you.  i consider this issue resolved.

     ...joe



On Nov 2, 2013, at 5:10 PM, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org> wrote:

> * Dr. A. Joseph Rockmore <rockmore@cyladian.com> [2013-09-17 14:34-0700]
>> i don't know if the period for comments on the turtle recommendation are closed (the w3.org web site is a bit inconsistent), but in case its not, i'd like to offer the following.
>> 
>> i would like to strongly suggest that the turtle recommendation include statement identifiers for reification.  in the work i am doing it is imperative to maintain provenance on all statements, and the only way i have been able to do this in turtle is via explicit reification, such as:
>> 
>> foo:statement1 a rdf:Statement ;
>> 	rdf:subject thingID1 ;
>> 	rdf:predicate propertyID1 ;
>> 	rdf:object value1 ;
>> 	foo:source value 2 ;
>> 	foo:dateAsserted value 3 ;
>> 	etc.
>> 
>> this is ugly and overly verbose.  we would like a mechanism like in RDF/XML that supports expressing the statementID explicitly so that reified statements can be made about the statement, without having to express the statements regarding the subject, predicate, and object separately.
>> 
>> thank you for considering this addition.
> 
> Dear Joe,
> 
> Thank you for your comment. I'm sorry to say that for the reasons
> below, the RDF WG has decided not to develop a shorthand syntax for
> reified statements in Turtle:
> 
>  There are no existing proposals. The Turtle REC will reflect current
>  practice in existing Turtle parsers/serializers, except where the
>  language is evolving to towards compatibility with SPARQL.
> 
>  The community is mostly using named graphs to address the use cases
>  for which reification was intended. Note that Trig is currently in
>  last call and expected to go the Candidate Recommendation very soon.
>  This specification can be seen as an extension of Turtle for
>  expressing named graphs.
> 
>  The RDF WG is almost at the end of its charter. Any changes at all
>  would make if difficult to publish a Recommendation before the WG
>  closes. A re-design of the language to enable reification would
>  likely take a long time.
> 
> -- 
> -ericP
> 
> office: +1.617.599.3509
> mobile: +33.6.80.80.35.59
> 
> (eric@w3.org)
> Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than
> email address distribution.
> 
> There are subtle nuances encoded in font variation and clever layout
> which can only be seen by printing this message on high-clay paper.