Re: "Language-tagged strings Re: Toward easier RDF: a proposal"

Hugh, Christian,

You can do what you describe already : see for example SKOS-XL which 
also discusses some issues.

The web already has language tags RFC5646 and I guess that is how they 
ended up in RDF via xml:lang and HTML. We should work with and use the 
outputs of these communities, not redo their work.

Often that's enough, and a concept general developers have come across 
(it's so common it is in standard programming language runtime libraries).

Sometimes, in some cases, more is needed and that is possible.

The case for "Triples and only triples":

We've done that before - reification, RDF containers (alt/seq/bag), RDF 
lists - all using the "triples everywhere" approach.  Nice 
conceptualization but hasn't worked out in practice.

A: Acceptance: General developers don't relate to the idea. They expect 
lists etc, not more triples that have to put back together again.

B: Inconsistencies and partial representations (see SKOS-XL) make for 
hard development (SHACL/ShEX would help). Support in toolkits is a burden.

C: Implementation and deployment: More triples is a burden.
10 million -> 15 million - Meh.  10 billion -> 15 billion - that does 
make a difference.


Received on Sunday, 25 November 2018 20:22:20 UTC