Re: propose to make syntax-qname-08-rq and syntax-qname-14-rq OBSOLETE from Dave Beckett on 2005-06-28 (public-rdf-dawg@w3.org from April to June 2005)

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 11:55:20 +0100
To: jos.deroo@agfa.com
Cc: andy.seaborne@hp.com, public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1119956121.20098.4.camel@hoth.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

On Tue, 2005-06-28 at 12:31 +0200, jos.deroo@agfa.com wrote:
> that proposal seems really fine to me + thanks for good catch
> with that proposal it is fine to query triples like
> 
> :postSurgicalState a :PatientState.
> pc:Jane a rim:Patient.
> pc:trial rim:Patient.confidentiality_cd rim:Confidentiality.ByAccessKind.

That looks ghastly and I don't see this as better than the current
state.  Either require dots or forbid them, don't allow them only in
some cases which makes it confusing for users (I can use a dot when?)
and hard for implementers (see the grammar contortions needed).

Dave

Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2005 10:57:45 UTC