- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 17:29:44 +0200
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- Cc: RDFA Working Group <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
I would say a triple set is neutral enough at this point. You should still put a note into the document saying that the terminology may change if the RDF WG settles on something... Thx Ivan On Apr 22, 2011, at 17:24 , Nathan wrote: > Hi All, Ivan, > > I'm editing the RDF API document at the minute, and trying to come up with a non offensive but still descriptive name for what was previously called GraphLiteral. > > Would you be prepared to allow the usage of any of the following: > - QuotedGraph > - TripleSet > - EmbeddedGraph > > I understand the hesitance to use GraphLiteral, but I'm also hesitant to use G-Box since it's starting to take on new meaning in the RDF WG to refer to a named set of triples which change over time (a Named-G-Box) rather than anonymous "triple container" as was originally intended - thus it could easily end up just being another IRI, or having a required name, both of which are different to this more general concept which is basically just allowing a Graph to sit in one of the triple slots. > > Best, > > Nathan ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Friday, 22 April 2011 15:28:56 UTC