W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > March 2011

Re: bang ! in turtle

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 18:48:52 +0000
Message-ID: <4D6D3F94.4050601@webr3.org>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
CC: antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Ivan Herman wrote:
> Sorry Nathan...

np Ivan, you know I'm not shy at suggesting things, just to get them out 
there, if you sat within striking distance I may be a little shyer with 
the suggestions though ;)

> I must admit I am really afraid of overcomplicating things. The beauty if Turtle is its simplicity.

agreed.

> Simplicity meaning that Turtle, as it is today, can be made understandable with a minimal knowledge of RDF, if any. Adding additional syntaxes may jeopardize this feature and make Turtle a much more geekier language. That may backfire on the community big time; we may end up in the RDF/XML situation making the language too complicated!

I must admit I don't share that worry, in that I don't see the 
complexity of RDF/XML being the bit on the left of the slash. I do 
however trust those older and wiser than me on these subjects, 
especially those who have a firm understanding of the full sem web space.

>>  ^a	[ owl:inverseOf rdf:type ]
> 
> As Sandro said, this is just an explanation, right? Formally, what you describe is a bnode that can be inferred to be an inverse, etc, etc

I'm happy with whatever words make it happen, one view is that it's 
sugar, the other is that it saves you declaring inverseOf properties all 
the time - either one roughly equates the same net result.

>>  >	rdfs:seeAlso
> 
> What justifies picking this specific predicate over anything else? Surely dc:title or dc:comment is more frequent than seeAlso, do we want to add a sign for those? This would have no end...

fair point.

> These are of course useful _if_ we defined a syntax for a rule language, or a serialization of RIF. Alas!, this is _not_ something for this WG.

as an aside: which WG (or XG?) would such things be something for?

>> predicate prefixes:
>>
>>  ^x	[ owl:inverseOf x ]
>>  >x	[ link:listDocumentProperty x ]
> 
> I am not even sure I understand this! I do not know what link:listDocumentProperty is...

np, it's more in the domain of "linked data" and nose following any how.

> What is this in terms of triples? I am serious, I simply do not understand what this is! And that might be significant: we'd create an overcomplicated structure. And we should be very very careful in my view.

consider it dropped :) ^ and ^a would be nice if they can be made to 
work - although I am wary of introducing unexpected results :(
(such as :a ^:b "foo" getting dropped and people wondering why).

Cheers,

Nathan
Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2011 18:49:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:03 UTC