- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 11:02:10 -0400
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>, RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 14:53 +0000, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>
> On 23/03/11 14:46, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 13:55 +0000, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> >>
> >> # These are not strict Turtle where everything
> >> # must be "subject-predicate" form.
> >> # They are SPARQL.
> >>
> >> ("a" "b" "c" ) .
> >
> > This should be flagged a little more clearly as "NOT RDF". A mapping
> > can reject this one and still be 100% RDF.
>
> To be clear - it is RDF (see the N-triples file) - but you can't write
> it like that in Turtle. You'd need to write part out in long hand.
Sorry, I misread that as not having the parens, as:
"a" "b" "c".
That is, I thought it was a literal subject and literal predicate.
-- Sandro
> [] rdf:first "a" ;
> rdf:rest ("b" "c") .
>
> >> [ :p (1 2) , (3 4) ] .
> >
> > Oh that's really not in Turtle? Sad, if true.
>
> Again, it is RDF, you just can't write it like that in Turtle.
>
> [] :p (1 2) , (3 4) .
>
> >>
> >> Attached:
> >> D.ttl (the data above)
> >> D.nt (converted to N-triples)
> >
> > Brilliant! And cruel! I'm trying to imagine Tom sitting on the
> > plane sorting this out against the various specs. He might find he'd
> > rather just write the code.
>
> And then there are illformed-for-shorthand-but-legal-RDF list-like
> structures.
>
> _:a rdf:first "a" ;
> rdf:first "b" ;
> rdf:rest _:a .
>
> They are cruel.
>
> >
> > -- Sandro
> >
>
> Andy
>
Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2011 15:02:24 UTC