- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 20:43:25 +0100
- To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Hi folks, It seems unlikely (:() that I shall be able to call in tomorrow (I'm traveling and -- like the packing incapable person that I really really am -- forgot my phone charger.) I'm trying to make arrangements with my teaching so that I can be on the call next week. I think the idea of an XML (toolchain friendly) Syntax is pretty obvious. I don't recall there being active hostility to it last group -- basically the champions (Kendall and me) ran out of steam. Re: RDF syntax. As I wrote before (and I believe on the champion page), this won't help with using XML tools or outreach to heavy XML users. RDF/XML just doesn't play nice in today's XML world...it *was* a pretty early application and it shows. Manchester doesn't care one way or the other about a triply syntax. I will note that the prior working group did reject a triple syntax (based on N3) for SPARQL queries (though adopting Turtleishness for BGPs). I believe that the debate took place at a Boston F2F with TimBL championing the triply syntax, but I was in other group meetings for those bits, IIRC. Perhaps Andy or Steve recall more (Lee? were you there?)? Anyway, I don't think that binds us per se, but I do think it's a separate issue. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Monday, 13 April 2009 19:45:59 UTC