Re: reified statements in Turtle (ISSUE-152)

Dear Joe,

[apologies, this acknowledge mt of receipt is long overdue.]

Thanks very much for your comment on the Turtle Candidate Recommendation.
We have creased an issue for tracking your comment [1]. We expect to get 
back to you soon with a response.

Best,
Guus Schreiber
co-chair RDF WG

[1] https://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/152

On 17-09-13 23:34, Dr. A. Joseph Rockmore wrote:
> i don't know if the period for comments on the turtle recommendation are
> closed (the w3.org <http://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.
>
>
>       ....joe
>
> **
> *A. Joseph Rockmore, PhD*
> *technology consulting *
> *650/759-5399*
>

Received on Tuesday, 8 October 2013 14:25:48 UTC