Re: bang ! in turtle

Le 01/03/2011 18:39, Nathan a écrit :
> Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> On 01/03/11 17:23, Nathan wrote:
>>> Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>>> On 01/03/11 16:41, Nathan wrote:
>>>>> actually ^ may be better.. such that
>>>>>
>>>>> :a :b :c .
>>>>>
>>>>> could be written as:
>>>>>
>>>>> :c ^:b :a .
>>>>>
>>>>> meaning
>>>>>
>>>>> :c [ owl:inverseOf :b ] :a .
>>>>
>>>> meaning there is a there is bnode in the predicate position.
> ...
>>>>
>>>> SPARQL has:
>>>>
>>>> :c ^:b :a .
>>>>
>>>> meaning
>>>>
>>>> :a :b :c
>>>>
>>>> reverses subject and object. The matching process really does swap
>>>> subject and object.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#propertypaths
>>>
>>> wouldn't that require subjects as literals?
>>
>> Yes.
>
> hmm, this is probably a fruitless conversation then, because we can't
> change the RDF semantics, and the choices are bnode predicates or
> literal subjects to allow this (and to align w/ sparql I guess..).

This is a syntax issue, no need to change the semantics at all to handle 
generalised RDF triple.
The issue here is only whether we are allowed or not to use a sweetener 
in the syntax so that we can write the subject in the third position and 
the object in the first position by simply adding an additional token to 
the triple.

>
> best,
>
> nathan
>


-- 
Antoine Zimmermann
Researcher at:
Laboratoire d'InfoRmatique en Image et Systèmes d'information
Database Group
7 Avenue Jean Capelle
69621 Villeurbanne Cedex
France
Lecturer at:
Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon
20 Avenue Albert Einstein
69621 Villeurbanne Cedex
France
antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr
http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/

Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2011 17:51:59 UTC