Re: RDF 2 Wishlist

On Nov 2, 2009, at 10:01 AM, Dave Beckett wrote:

> Jie Bao wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:
>>> So, what should W3C standardize next in the area of RDF, if  
>>> anything?
>>
>> replace (with backward compatibility assurance) the use of plain
>> literals with rdf:PlainLiteral [1] - this datatype is defined in the
>> RDF namespace anyway.
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-text/
>
> rdf:PlainLiteral is a hilarious bad idea

No, it is a good IDEA. Maybe not such a good proposal. The details  
might need a little work, though its hard to do it right because that  
would break SPARQL. Basically, if we had caught plain literals before  
SPAQL was set in stone, things would be a lot better, but they aren't,  
so some messiness is inevitable.
>
> Don't use it for anything and definitely don't put it into core RDF.
>
> If you want to know more - primarily because it cannot encode all RDF
> plain/typed literals (it is incomplete just like RDF/XML)

BUt it can do some things that current RDF cannot do, such as have  
typed literals with language tags, that are urgently needed out in the  
real world.

> and has no rules
> for escaping the characters used for separators (@, <, >).

No need to escape the @ because it is used in a fixed position. Which  
is also ugly, but hey ho.

Pat

>  Hilarious.
>
> Dave
>
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes

Received on Monday, 2 November 2009 18:54:46 UTC