Re: Semantic Web Languages

* Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> [2006-04-02 08:49+0200]
> 
> 
> On 31 Mar 2006, at 23:58, John F. Sowa wrote:
> >Danny,
> >
> >I don't violently disagree with anything you said, but I
> >do have some quibbles and a couple of extra points:
> >
> >> One of my dayjob contracts requires a kind of validation
> >> outside of RDF/OWL, this I'm implementing using custom
> >> (mostly hard-coded) logic on top of the RDF/OWL representation.
> >> ... Throughout this work I'm mixing and matching numerous
> >> RDFS vocabularies/OWL ontologies as demanded by the domain.
> >
> >I realize that many people have been doing useful work with RDF
> >and OWL, and since nothing better is widely available, people
> >have to live with what they've been given.  But I believe that
> >anything that has been done with RDF could have been done sooner,
> >better, and with much greater efficiency with an XML tag that
> >says LANG=TupleList followed by an enclosed list of tuples in
> >the form (and with the option of n-ary tuples as well):
> >
> >   (R1 a b) (R2 c d) (R3 e f) (R4 g h) ...
> 
> There have been numerous xml proposals along this line. Tim Bray  
> proposed one.
> TriX is another [1]. But you could also look at NTriples [3] for a  
> very simple non xml version.

NTriples was based on TimBL's Notation 3, 
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Notation3.html which was also an ancestor
of Turtle (a simpler and more triple-centric subset),
http://www.dajobe.org/2004/01/turtle/  which itself influenced the 
design of the SPARQL syntax for querying RDF. 

In fact, I wouldn't be suprised if folks started using SPARQL notation 
for writing RDF... 

Dan

Received on Sunday, 2 April 2006 07:21:11 UTC