- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 21:36:42 -0400
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 07/30/2012 06:37 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>
>> BUt surely IF this is a good idea and worth having, which Im assuming
>> it is, then the longer we wait, the more problems there will be with
>> deployed systems out there which don't support it. Kicking the can
>> down the road is not a good way to handle problems of legacy inertia.
>>
>
> Your argument would apply to literals-as-subjects as well; it's
> largely a syntax restriction. If that's going to happen, it isn't in
> this WG (by charter), so why not make the changes in one step, not in
> multiple steps?
If literals-as-subject were primarily a matter of syntax, or were seen
as inevitable, I don't think they'd have been ruled out by the
charter. I understand the reasons were mostly about data structures
and implementation techniques, but I wasn't paying close attention to
the technical content, so perhaps I misunderstood.
It might be interesting to ask again.
-- Sandro
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2012 01:36:48 UTC