W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > November 2009

Re: RDF 2 Wishlist: Turtle Syntax

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 00:06:21 +0100
Message-ID: <eb19f3360911011506s3f822f05naa7657015544443e@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>
Cc: Simon Reinhardt <simon.reinhardt@koeln.de>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, semantic-web@w3.org
On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 9:35 PM, Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/11/2 Simon Reinhardt <simon.reinhardt@koeln.de>:
>> Hi
>>
>> Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 2009/11/1 Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>:
>>>> > So, what should W3C standardize next in the area of RDF, if anything?
>>>>
>>>> Turtle syntax.
>
>> Turtle is out there and to my knowledge every important RDF library supports
>> it - and OWL API does as well. I support having it as a recommendation - not
>> only to give it the status it deserves but also to finally sort out the
>> media type problems around Turtle and N3. :-)
>
> To really sort out the issues between Turtle and N3 it would be nice
> to also push N3 through the process if it is developed properly at
> this stage.

Don't forget Turtle/N3 and SPARQL patterns, or N3 'and/or/vs' SPARQL
Named Graphs...

It'd be good to see the named graph concepts brought into the RDF/OWL
mainstream, rather than left in the query language. So Pat Hayes'
recent paper was encouraging there...

Dan
Received on Sunday, 1 November 2009 23:06:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:03 UTC