W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > July 2012

Re: in...of syntax Re: Turtle Last Call: Request for Review

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:14:55 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFfrAFp01CQg0vAhZge1eG2oZN83YWUB9rZNXa2KJi1Q0wNQFA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Cc: Souripriya Das <SOURIPRIYA.DAS@oracle.com>, public-rdf-comments Comments <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>, W3C RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 30 July 2012 10:05, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> (Sorry for the late reaction, I was on vacations...)
> The ^P formalism and syntax is already part of the SPARQL 1.1 query language, part of the property path features. Ie, if adopted in Turtle, it would not create any compatibility problems with SPARQL 1.1 (which would not be the case with the 'is ... of' syntax).

That's a strong argument in favour of it, and against is/of, imho.

> RDFa has the @rev attribute that is used for the same purpose. In my own practice @rev is not used very often; however, when it is, it is damn useful, that is for sure...

I believe part of this has been uncertainty; people weren't sure if it
was "in HTML" or not. But it is pretty niche, although as you say
useful when needed.

Part of the trouble with 'rev=' is it brings us face to face with two
rather different notions of 'link': semantic relationships vs
documents having little blue clickable mentions of other documents. So
if a.html has rev= pointing to b.html, we're confused: "Does this mean
that B is linking to A?". Hard stuff to explain clearly.

> _Personally_, I would be in favour adding ^P to Turtle.



> Caveat: if we do that, Turtle would have to go through a second last call. Sigh...

> Ivan
> On Jul 18, 2012, at 15:02 , Souripriya Das wrote:
>> I too would prefer the use of ^P (to indicate opposite direction of edge) than use of "is P of" for the same reasons that Dan cited.
>> Thanks,
>> - Souri.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: steve.harris@garlik.com
>> To: danbri@danbri.org
>> Cc: public-rdf-comments@w3.org
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 7:44:34 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
>> Subject: Re: in...of syntax Re: Turtle Last Call: Request for Review
>> On 2012-07-18, at 12:27, Dan Brickley wrote:
>> …snip…
>>>> A massive +1. Having been burned by that in the past, it is indeed a very good argument for it.
>>>> The argument about generating Turtle data from pre-existing hashes is also a very good one. I've written a few of these 'RDFizers' in the past, just recursively going through a hash and outputting a string that happens to be valid Turtle (see https://github.com/moustaki/bbc-serialiser for example, which is currently in use on a few BBC websites) - and having a way to write triples in both directions make that a *lot* easier...
>>> If (a) it could be done identically in SPARQL 1.1 and Turtle (b) it
>>> was done with punctuation (e.g. ^) rather than pseudo-English, i'd be
>>> supportive.
>>> (Is 'is isPrimaryTopicOf of' the same as 'primaryTopic'? The existence
>>> of isPrimaryTopicOf is a good reason for exploring such a design...)
>>> Every difference we create between SPARQL and Turtle diminishes the
>>> value and teachability of both…
>> +1
>> - Steve
>> --
>> Steve Harris, CTO
>> Garlik, a part of Experian
>> +44 7854 417 874  http://www.garlik.com/
>> Registered in England and Wales 653331 VAT # 887 1335 93
>> Registered office: Landmark House, Experian Way, Nottingham, Notts, NG80 1ZZ
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Monday, 30 July 2012 09:15:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:18 UTC