Re: On Graphis in Turtle (was Re: today's minutes available)

Hello Again, 


On 28 Sep 2011, at 23:45, Arnaud Le Hors wrote:

> Hi all,
> I was on a cellphone driving and it was too noisy for me to voice my 
> opinion then but I meant to say that, regarding the Graphs in Turtle 
> question, I find the @graph proposal more appealing than the {} one. I 
> think it is more consistent with what we already have in Turtle.
> 
> It might sound silly but on a practical level I also find it convenient to 
> be able to add an @graph statement in my existing document without having 
> to re-indent all the following lines the way I would with the {} proposal. 
> I know that's not necessarily a high priority criteria but at the same 
> time Turtle was invented to make it easy for humans to write and read rdf 
> so I'd argue it's not totally off base either.

Personally, I would rather not invent new things, and stick with one of the existing quad based serialisations, i.e. TriG or N-Quads. 

@graph, would imply that you could have a document with loads of triples to start with (seemingly Turtle) and then you would all of a sudden come across an "@graph <http://foo.example/>" like statement, and you would suddenly have to start parsing quads, this makes me feel slightly uncomfortable. 

Mischa
> 
> Finally, although I don't know what actually triggered Sandro's question 
> about whether the file contains the complete graph or not, it seems to me 
> that the {} proposal makes it look like what I'm seeing is the complete 
> graph when it may not be. I know it's up to us to define that there is no 
> such implication but I'd rather select a syntax that is more intuitive and 
> less likely to mislead a casual reader/user who may not have read the spec 
> carefully enough.
> 
> Regards.
> --
> Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From:   Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
> To:     <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
> Date:   09/28/2011 09:21 AM
> Subject:        today's minutes available
> Sent by:        public-rdf-wg-request@w3.org
> 
> 
> 
> at http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-09-28
> 
> 
> 
> 

___________________________________
Mischa Tuffield PhD
Email: mischa.tuffield@garlik.com
Homepage - http://mmt.me.uk/
+44(0)208 439 8200  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