W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > October 2022

Re: RDF lists/arrays and n-ary relations [was Re: OWL and RDF lists]

From: Hugh Glaser <hugh@glasers.org>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2022 15:29:45 +0100
Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
Message-Id: <CE78E2A0-8D14-4675-844D-85FF4A1D4A6A@glasers.org>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>

There are many agreements about what to do that get discussed on this list that are not about extending RDF.
Agreeing that the name “FOAF” should commonly be used, rather than “XXZZZYY”.
prefix.cc captures many such conventions for us.

And things like It would be sensible to have a discussion here that “dct" is better to use than “dc”.
But also that the convention should be “dcterms”.

The world in every field is full of such conventions that are opaque or meaningless to people who aren’t aware of them.

And much of this discussion comes out of the desire to make RDF more accessible to people who are not so familiar with it..
Defining and exposing idioms and conventions explicitly is very much part of such an activity.


> On 30 Sep 2022, at 12:40, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
> If the names have to be ordered what information does this ordering impart?  It now looks as if you want to transmit some information to another unnamed party without telling anyone else about it.   Go ahead and create a private semantic extension for RDFS.  There is no problem with that, but then why are you discussing what you want to do in this forum without also saying what this semantic extension is about.
> peter
Received on Saturday, 1 October 2022 14:30:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 1 October 2022 14:30:04 UTC