RE: W3C TriX schema issue

Hi Jeremy,

Thanks for the feedback.

I was taking a closer look at the schema and saw the <triple> element also allows <plainLiteral> and <typedLiteral> in the subject position.
I guess this could be refined a bit too.

As for using blank nodes for graph names in RDF1.1, I would expect this should be done with a change to the TriX namespace URI, as the change is not backwards compatible to RDF1.0 (i.e. might break existing tooling).
Seems it would be easy enough to allow a choice between <id> or <uri> element to identify the named graph.

Regards,

John Walker
Business Analyst, Marketing and Communications
NXP Semiconductors

From: Jeremy J Carroll [mailto:jjc@syapse.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 9:33 PM
To: John Walker
Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
Subject: Re: W3C TriX schema issue

Hello

the trix work was done about a decade ago as an informal named graphs task force within the interest group.
The lead on the TriX work, was Patrick Stickler, and I was second fiddle.

I believe Patrick has updated the Nokia version from time to time, but he is no longer with Nokia, and so I would be surprised if we can expect further change there (except, maybe, for the eventual 404-ing of the schema: my understanding is that it is no longer playing into their business imperatives)

In terms of whom to petition, as a SWIG artifact, it is up to this group to do something - and the IG chair (who I believe is still Dan Brickley) is likely to be happy for participants from W3C members (such as yourself) to edit the files in accordance with consensus (lack of opposition) on this list.

My 2c is that given that RDF1.1 seems to be about to permit blank nodes as graph names, then an update to trix should do so as well, and allowing a single unnamed default graph also seems like an improvement.

Jeremy J Carroll
Principal Architect
Syapse, Inc.



On Sep 26, 2013, at 6:43 AM, John Walker <john.walker@nxp.com<mailto:john.walker@nxp.com>> wrote:


Hi,

We have recently begun to use TriX as a serialization format for named graphs and want to use the W3C schema [1] for validation purposes.

However we discovered (what we consider to be) an error. The schema requires one and only one <uri> element for a <graph>, we would expect zero or one to allow for the contents of the default graph to be serialized.

The schema hosted by nokia [2] is again different and allows zero or more.

Also the name of the root element is different between the two schema: <trix> vs. <TriX>

Which should be considered leading and who to petition to get the error fixed?

[1] http://www.w3.org/2004/03/trix/trix-1/trix-1.0.xsd
[2] http://sw.nokia.com/trix/trix-1.0.xsd

Regards,

John Walker
Business Analyst, Marketing and Communications
NXP Semiconductors