On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 17:10 +0100, Nathan wrote: >> In all honesty, if this doesn't happen, I personally will have no choice >> but to move to N3 for the bulk of things, and hope for other >> serializations of N3 to come along. > > RIF (which became a W3C Recommendation last week) is N3, mutated (in > some good ways and some bad ways, I suppose) by the community consensus > process. RIF is simultaneously the heir to N3 and a standard business > rules format. > > RIF's central syntax is XML-based, but there's room for a presentation > syntax that looks like N3. RIF includes triples which can have > literals as subject, of course. (In RIF, these triples are called > "frames". Well, sets of triples with a shared subject are called > frames, technically. But they are defined by the spec to be an > extension of RDF triples.) Excellent, so there's no need to mess with RDF itself for a while? We can let RIF settle in for a couple years and see how it shapes up against people's RDFCore 2.0 aspirations? DanReceived on Thursday, 1 July 2010 16:34:15 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:18 UTC