Re: Activating lower layer issues

At 07:04 PM 6/26/01 +0100, Brian McBride wrote:
>Graham, you have made a proposal for an absract syntax and semantics.  I am
>assuming that you feel pretty neutral about the actual concrete form of
>the syntax and that n-triple can represent everything you need at the
>syntactic level.  If that is so, then we can focus on the question of
>reification on the semantics rather than the syntax.

Yes, with one proviso:

Some semantics depend on an interpretation of more than one triple used in 
concert.  Following the style of attaching interpretations to syntax 
productions, it may be necessary use a "model syntax" that is more complex 
than the minimal syntax needed to describe N-triple.

Otherwise, I fully agree that everything can be based on a concrete, 
parseable representation that we call N-triple (an important property of 
which is that, modulo trivial matters like statement ordering, there is 
only one way to represent any given RDF graph).

#g


------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne                    Baltimore Technologies
Strategic Research              Content Security Group
<Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>    <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
                                 <http://www.baltimore.com>
------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Thursday, 28 June 2001 09:29:34 UTC