Re: Best Practice for Renaming OWL Vocabulary Elements

>
> It seems a bit much to expect a query writer/developer to maintain
> literally unreadable source code.
>

That's kind of the point: the humans should be talking in human terms, not
machine terms. SPARQL forces humans to use machine terms, which is bad.

You're right that using pure IDs for *predicates* is impractical if you have
to hand-write/maintain queries, but at least your set of predicates is
smaller and more stable than your set of nodes, generally. And the
RDF/RDFS/OWL predicates are almost completely stable, by definition. So to
me using pure IDs for nodes is practical enough to do with current
technology, and making it possible to separate IDs and names for predicates
is an issue to be addressed in the future, either *in* SPARQL or by
replacing SPARQL.

g