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

2010/1/14 Pat Hayes <>:

> 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.

Don't think I fully understand what you have in mind, are you talking:

<s> <p> <x, y, z> (which is kinda supported already with turtle syntax)


<s> <p1,x> <p2,y> <p3,z> (which is also kinda supported already, albeit lengthy)

or something else?

n-tuples would certainly have the advantage of mapping more directly
to SQL-style data


Received on Thursday, 14 January 2010 16:36:01 UTC