- From: Bruce D'Arcus <bdarcus@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:02:20 -0400
- To: "<>" <_@whats-your.name>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
<> wrote: >> I'm not so sure I agree with the syntax-is-the-problem tradition. >> Surely syntax is one issue, but I tend to think it was just as much >> lack of a) well-developed tool infrastructure (since you should be >> working with models, not syntax), and b) a standard query >> language. >> > > the agile / ruby / python / microformats / web 2.0 developer > communities are born from 'languages simple enough that you can write > it in notepad' (well, they use textmate). this precludes requiring > an IDE just to edit stuff, or XML libraries to turn unreadable gunk > into in-memory models. As someone drawn to the "agile languages" myself (though not much of a programmer), I certainly respect the general principle, but not really the last point. If I have a good RDF library in my language of choice, I don't care a whole lot about the syntax. >> Both of those are being resolved. > > can you explain why one query language is a good thing. especially > when it introduces another (!) syntax to the equation, and is heavily > dependent on argument order for performance. surely exposing basic > pattern matching primitives via a REST interface, and letting the > user specify queries in XML or JSON does a better job of letting a > semantic web organically grow while reusing existing parts, than > 'prescribing' a new solution that also requires a new tool chain for > parsing/serializing/editing... My understanding is the decision with SPARQL was to make it a) SQL-like, and b) similar to N3 (as Tim just noted). And it has XML and JSON results formats. Seems reasonable enough to me. ... >> Um ... sure, but what's wrong with N3 or turtle that requires yet >> another slightly different syntax? Isn't there a JS-based RDF >> parser that can handle N3? > > there are a few. but none are as fast as JSON, since that uses a fast > VM level eval(), instead of JS level string parsing regex stuff.. > > so JSON gets you the readablity of Turtle without the speed hit of > even N3.. OK, so it's better to create a new syntax than to optimize the existing infrastructure of N3 tools? Bruce
Received on Thursday, 26 July 2007 23:01:58 UTC