W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Requirements for a possible "RDF 2.0"

From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:14:42 +0100
Message-ID: <1f2ed5cd1001140814x3b8fae5bocb7cefad90408060@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Hammond, Tony" <t.hammond@nature.com>
Cc: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, Chris Welty <cawelty@gmail.com>, semantic-web <semantic-web@w3.org>
2010/1/14 Hammond, Tony <t.hammond@nature.com>:
>
>> But please don't kill blank nodes !

Sorry Chris on thread etiquette, but +1 to that.

There's a huge argument in favour of giving everything a (HTTP) URI,
and as far as I can tell from the approach taken by Talis in the
Platform stores, there's very little downside to this, the actual cost
of minting & maintaining URIs is the least of our worries. Likewise
timbl's Give Yourself a URI over everyone being blank nodes.

But although getting rid of blank nodes may not be throwing the baby
out with the bathwater, it's at least a limb or two. I'd point to the
correspondence with variables in SPARQL, you can stick a ?x in the
middle of a complex structure, even if you don't care about the
value(s) of ?x itself. The related value(s) one can get through
implication are worthwhile, even if the thing itself isn't available
over HTTP. IMHO, €0.02.

Love the Rumsfeld quote.

Cheers,
Danny.
Received on Thursday, 14 January 2010 16:15:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:04 UTC