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

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

From: Paul Trevithick <ptrevithick@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:42:15 -0500
Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-Id: <C6AF9C8A-519A-4C4B-9335-E280784606D4@gmail.com>
To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
+1 

<s> <p> <x, y, z> is more intuitive to most developers coming to RDF from other modeling worlds.

On Jan 14, 2010, at 11:35 AM, Danny Ayers wrote:

> 2010/1/14 Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>:
> 
>> 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)
> 
> or
> 
> <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
> 
> Cheers,
> Danny.
> 
Received on Friday, 15 January 2010 08:58:00 UTC

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