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

Re: URI aliases for RDF terms?

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 16:44:19 +0000
Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>, Ian Davis <ian.davis@talis.com>, W3C RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <D7E79C6F-8373-4037-B6DF-6B8B77BD22DC@cyganiak.de>
To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
On 12 Nov 2011, at 23:06, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> Following this scenario, we could say that <http://n.w3.org/rdf/type> and <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> are the same node

No, they will always be different nodes, but it could be made so that in RDF 2.0 / SPARQL 2.0, the query SELECT * WHERE { ?s a ?o } would match either of these nodes. This could be achieved in various ways, for example by baking the equivalence of these terms into the basic RDF 2.0 semantics.

If we *want* to have shorter IRIs for basic RDF/RDFS/OWL terms, then surely we can find some way to make it work, no? And surely, laying some initial non-normative groundwork *now* will help a lot to prepare for a normative introduction of these IRIs in a future round of RDF/SPARQL standardization a few years down the road.

> (But I'll go along with it if SELECT (SUM(?salary) AS ?checkAmount) { ?who foaf:given_name "eric" ; mit:salary ?salary } doubles my salary.)

(If you want a change in RDF that potentially doubles your salary, then anything that helps to align RDF with HTML and microdata is not a bad idea.)

Received on Sunday, 13 November 2011 16:45:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:10 UTC