Re: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ?

On Mon, 2011-04-04 at 08:35 -0400, Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider
wrote:
> From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ?
> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 08:52:25 -0500
> 
> [...]
> 
> > To make your preference, which I share, slightly more objective:
> > 
> > Turtle square brackets allow one to write data in a subject-oriented
> > style instead of triple-oriented style.  This is something we've been
> > talking about for JSON, a little.   It's the only way native JSON or XML
> > allows data to be written, which I take a solid evidence it's a style
> > that is relatively natural and comfortable to people.
> > 
> > So, Turtle lets you write either way -- triple or subject oriented.
> 
> This is a surprise to me.
> 
> I don't think that you can say something like, for example.
>   ex:John ex:loves < ex:Mary ex:hates ex:John >
> which I would expect you to be able to if Turtle was truely subject
> oriented (except at top level).

In my experience, people doing purely subject-oriented data don't worry
about IDs, so this isn't a problem.   For them it's a tree of predicates
and literal data values, which Turtle can do fine.  At some point, they
start to want IDs, but those are grafted on later, at some higher level
(as with xml:id).

One way to do what you're suggesting in Turtle would be:

        ex:John eg:loves [ = ex:Mary; ex:hates ex:John ];

(where = would be defined as somewhat like owl:sameAs, but handled by
the parser.)   I think N3 has this, but I'm not sure where.

    -- Sandro

> > Except at the top level.  That's what ISSUE-19 is about.  I say "yes" to
> > ISSUE-19 because I think when you're working in a subject-oriented
> > style, you shouldn't have to step out of it just because you're at the
> > top level.
> > 
> >      -- Sandro
> 
> peter
>

Received on Monday, 4 April 2011 15:46:17 UTC