Re: RDF 2.0 Wishlist - Legal RDF which I can't SPARQL

On 29 Jul 2010, at 15:05, Mischa Tuffield wrote:

> Hello, 
> On 29 Jul 2010, at 13:51, Damian Steer wrote:

>> Personally I would follow IRI and fix turtle. Why should RDF have its own URL/URI/IRI-ish syntax?
> Do you think that the same logic should be applied to rdfxml too ? Otherwise there will be things you can write in turtle and not in rdfxml which you can subsequently sparql, which simply doesn't feel right to me. 

Oh yes, s/URIRef/IRI/ everywhere possible. For reference, [1] provides the rationale for the original decision not to do this substitution.


[1] <>

Received on Thursday, 29 July 2010 14:44:08 UTC