- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 22:13:55 +0000
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: nathan@webr3.org, RDF-WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 2 Mar 2011, at 19:32, Sandro Hawke wrote: > 2. The first, our standard version of Turtle, should be very > conservative, inside the space of nearly all existing turtle documents > and software. +1 > 3. We should have a different syntax, with a different mime-type, for > handling [GRAPHS] in a Turtle-like language. > > If that's true, the next big issue is whether this second syntax is (as > Ivan proposed) just Turtle plus the minimum needed to handle extra > graphs (TriG?), or whether (since we don't have nearly as much BC to > worry about) we should take the opportunity to add some extra stuff > here. Adding extra stuff? I'd actually propose the opposite: Let's throw some stuff out from the [GRAPHS] format. At the moment, I see multi-graph formats used mainly to exchange dumps between SPARQL stores. Hence I see this as the main use case to address. We've learned from N-Triples that line-based formats are great for exchanging dumps. So, let's take N-Triples and add an optional 4th element to deal with [GRAPHS]. A la N-Quads [1], but being explicit about what the 4th element is. Also add some other good bits along the lines Andy suggested elsewhere (UTF-8, base URI, proper media type). And declare victory. Best, Richard [1] http://sw.deri.org/2008/07/n-quads/ > > [the rest of your email has good stuff, but I don't have time to respond > at the moment.] > > -- Sandro > > > > >> If we can't change turtle, and can't do super-turtle or qurtle, why and >> how can we even discuss graphs of any form? >> >> Syntax sugar like ^ prefix, in scope? >> >> Quoted Graphs, in scope? >> - if yes, what to they resolve to in the RDF semantics? how would that >> work? >> >> Graph Literals? >> - what's the difference between quoted graphs? >> >> variables? >> >> changes to the semantics? >> - if no, can changes like g-box be introduced without being in the >> semantics? >> >> changes to the concepts? >> - if yes, what about B.C. with RDF/XML? existing deployed data and >> processors? how can they change but the semantics not? >> >> align turtle with sparql? >> - if yes, how without variables, subject literals and all the other bits? >> >> Sorry, I feel like we need to know what definitely cannot happen, what >> definitely can and what's a grey area, for this WG. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Nathan >> >> > > >
Received on Wednesday, 2 March 2011 22:14:29 UTC