W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: Data in turtle syntax

From: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 15:41:09 +0100
Message-ID: <492f2b0b0910090741g75fe1e9cg31ede6eb4610ec23@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
see below

2009/10/9 Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org]
>> On Behalf Of Birte Glimm
>> Sent: 09 October 2009 14:29
>> To: SPARQL Working Group
>> Subject: Data in turtle syntax
>> Hi all,
>> for the entailment regimes we discussed whether it would be
>> possible/sensible to allow other syntaxes than RDF XML for the queried
>> data.
> The syntax does not matter. It's abstract data model of triples in a graph that matters.  How they came to be there is not important.  RDF/XML, Turtle, GRDDL, RDFa, API inserts, private syntax, - all the same.  SPARQL/Query does not get involved (a FROM is a HTTP GET and there is content negotiation).
> It's triples all the way down.
>        Andy

Ok, so that's good. Still RIF might be problematic because it is not
triples at least not the rules, although the data itself can be seen
as triples and the rules just specify the entailments in a sense.


>> A natural choice apart from RDF XML that is not specific to
>> certain entailment regimes would be turtle syntax. Can I already
>> specify my RDF data in turtle and query that in accordance with the
>> spec? If not in accordance with the spec, do systems support turtle
>> input?
>> This is obviously not normative. Any system might reject non-RDF XML
>> input, but many systems might happily take it.
>> If not even turtle is allowed, are there any plans for doing that as
>> an optional syntax?
>> For other entailment regimes other syntaxes might also be useful,
>> e.g., functional style syntax or OWL XML for systems that support some
>> form of OWL entailment. All OWL syntaxes can easily be converted into
>> RDF XML, so one could live with purely RDF XML, only RIF would be in
>> trouble since RIF cannot be represented in RDF XML.
>> Birte
>> --
>> Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 306
>> Computing Laboratory
>> Parks Road
>> Oxford
>> OX1 3QD
>> United Kingdom
>> +44 (0)1865 283529

Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 306
Computing Laboratory
Parks Road
United Kingdom
+44 (0)1865 283529
Received on Friday, 9 October 2009 14:41:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:00:57 UTC