- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 15:19:37 +0100
- To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Cc: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <3D1102C7-F9AF-45F4-AC2A-57AEEFB1CB36@w3.org>
Toby, just a few remarks/questions On Jan 11, 2011, at 14:36 , Toby Inkster wrote: [snip] > > Other high-level changes unrelated to Notation 3 that should be made: > > 1. Literals are currently allowed to have both a datatype and a > language. This goes beyond even the Notation 3 data model, so I do not > see what is gained by allowing this in the RDF API. Literals should be > forced to pick a camp. > > 2. Drop special support for rdf:PlainLiteral. rdf:PlainLiteral is not > used much in the wild and was never intended to be - it's a datatype > used internally by OWL 2 and RIF. Adding special support for it > complicates implementations for no reason - it should be treated the > same as any other custom datatype. > Not exactly, and the RDF WG might pick this up. There is a certain amount of mess with plain literals, xs:strings etc, already, and the plain literal has come up because of that. THere is an entry in the charter to, possibly, look at this mess in RDF. I would prefer to keep it in the API > 3. Move terms, prefixes and profiles into the RDFa API or, better yet, > drop them altogether. They make the API harder to implement and harder > to grok while adding very little benefit. For those people who want to > use prefixes and terms, they can be implemented quite trivially in "user > space". > > See: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Oct/0131.html I am not sure. I have been using something like namespaces in RDFLib for many years, I think there is a similar facility in Jena, and it would have been very unhandy not to have that. I would prefer to keep something like that. I agree for profiles, though. > > 4. Move or copy PropertyGroups from the RDFa API into the RDF API. The > Graph interface should have getItemsByType, getItemBySubject and > getItemsByProperty methods which return PropertyGroups or arrays of > them. I would be happy with that > > 5. Rename PropertyGroup to something like "RDFItem", "RDFResource" or > "Description", or indeed "FartWarbler" - any name you pick out a hat > will be better than the status quo. The status quo was based on the fact that we did not have a better name:-) Ivan > > -- > Toby A Inkster > <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> > <http://tobyinkster.co.uk> > > ---- 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
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Tuesday, 11 January 2011 14:20:22 UTC