Re: AW: {Disarmed} Re: blank nodes (once again) from Gregg Reynolds on 2011-03-24 (semantic-web@w3.org from March 2011)

From: Gregg Reynolds <dev@mobileink.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:32:38 -0500
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>, Graham Klyne <GK-lists@ninebynine.org>, Dieter Fensel <dieter.fensel@sti2.at>, Enrico Franconi <franconi@inf.unibz.it>, Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Mark Wallace <mwallace@modusoperandi.com>, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, Reto Bachmann-Gmuer <reto.bachmann@trialox.org>, Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com>, Ivan Shmakov <ivan@main.uusia.org>, "<semantic-web@w3.org>" <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=tR2uTaNEt9h3+mrXH03sZ9ZyRCLM9QgboVXwj@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:

>
> I don't know of real data about this, and I may not be representative,
> but I know when I write RDF by hand, and when I write software which
> constructs RDF, I often find it easier to use blank nodes than to think
> about what to name every item referred to in my content.
>

+1

There are lots of places where no name is preferable to a name that may
mislead or confuse, or the clutter of lots of UUIDs.

-g

Received on Thursday, 24 March 2011 15:33:11 UTC