Re: Alternatives to containers/collections (was Re: Requirements for a possible "RDF 2.0")

On Jan 14, 2010, at 8:46 AM, Danny Ayers wrote:

> 2010/1/14 Steve Harris <>:
>>> * containers (Bag, Alt, Seq) - quiet deprecation would probably be  
>>> the
>>> best bet, supported by clear instruction on how to use Lists
>> Well... partly, I'm still not sold on Lists, they're hugely  
>> inconvenient to
>> deal with in their triple form, and cause significant data-bloat.
> I don't disagree, though the theory seems neater than containers, in
> practice they do seem really clunky. Any thoughts on what might be a
> better paradigm? Anything perhaps lightly layered on top of the
> container style?

A lot, perhaps all, of this hair could be avoided if RDF allowed  
general tuples as well as triples. All that is needed is some way to  
put N things into a sequence: so, put N things into a sequence. The  
'graph model' would be a hyperlink, drawn as a polygon (eg triangle  
for N=3) rather than a line. In triples-style syntax, it would just be  
moving a dot.


> Cheers,
> Danny.

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

Received on Thursday, 14 January 2010 15:22:29 UTC