- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 12:50:20 -0400
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
On 5/10/20 7:55 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: > I believe there would be a lot of > value in an established RDF vocabulary to declare new functions (in > various languages). +1 > c) The general question to me remains whether there are sufficient > advantages of starting from scratch, vs working with the SPARQL > community to define extensions that would allow N3 use cases to be > covered by SPARQL 1.2. I think the existence of the N3 community group already answers that question: Yes. Although I have routinely used SPARQL as my preferred hammer, I am also very aware of how verbose it is when used as rules language. The conciseness of N3 is one of the key reasons why I think it is good to explore, as another option. But I also like your idea of trying to achieve compatibility between SPARQL and N3. That's a good thing to keep in mind. David Booth
Received on Monday, 11 May 2020 16:50:33 UTC