- From: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
- Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2015 10:26:11 +0200
- To: bergi <bergi@axolotlfarm.org>
- Cc: Nicola Greco <me@nicolagreco.com>, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, "public-rdfjs@w3.org" <public-rdfjs@w3.org>, Adrian Gschwend <ktk@netlabs.org>, me@nicola.io
Hi Bergi,
> I'm open to discuss any piece of RDF-Ext/RDF-Interfaces.
Awesome!
> But my focus is
> and was always to have low barriers for people that are new to RDF. A
> little performance drawback is OK for me, if the API is at the end much
> more readable.
Absolutely. Maybe I expressed myself wrongly before.
I just want to avoid things like the following (being extreme on purpose):
var t = new rdf.Triple(new rdf.BlankNode(s), new rdf.IRI(o), new rdf.DataTypedLiteral(o, t));
I choose the other extreme for N3.js, where every entity is just a string, and a triple a plain object.
The most interesting options are likely in the middle, and hence worthy of discussion.
> Just two examples which show that the modular approach works:
>
> https://www.npmjs.com/package/passport
> https://www.npmjs.com/package/turf
Sure. But at the same time, we might want to avoid that people new to RDF
have to import several modules just to do a simple thing.
We should have a vision on what is considered core and what not.
> I invite everybody to write down proposals and ideas to:
>
> https://github.com/rdf-ext/discussions
I'd like to start a discussion on possible triple/quad representations,
including the alternatives we currently have.
Would it be okay if I started a Wiki page for that?
(I'm afraid an issue would get too messy,
because of its purely chronological structure.)
Best,
Ruben
Received on Sunday, 13 September 2015 08:26:44 UTC