- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:43:26 +0100
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 2011-10-17, at 15:32, Sandro Hawke wrote: ... >> +1 to setting up an XG to look into list literals, graph literals and similar. >> >> RDF-WG should standardize what's already used and shown to work. A focused XG is a good place for doing some research and developing proposals for RDF2. > > I agree re list-literals. Not sure about graph-literals. > > I'm not really comfortable with giving no guidance whatsoever about Seq > and Lists. My perception is there's general (if not unanimous) > agreement that Lists are better than Seq, Interesting - in my corner of the RDF world, mostly database geeks, it seems like the lists (Collections) get more bile. I think database geeks are outnumbered by logic geeks though, in the semweb world. - Steve -- Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK +44 20 8439 8203 http://www.garlik.com/ Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11 Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Wednesday, 19 October 2011 14:44:04 UTC