- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:50:04 +0100
- To: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- CC: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Jan Grant wrote:
[...]
>
> Fine. How do I name anonymous "thing"s in n3? It wasn't on the WG
> reading list :-)
>
> If I can do that and there's a simple (ie, sed) transformation
> between triple(s, p, o) and some well-defined subset of n3 then I'm
> happy.
We don't want to spend forever on this.
Jan has made a proposal for a simple triple based syntax. DanC has
said he'd prefer something N3 compatible.
I'm assuming that for clarity we'd be restricting test cases to the
simplest
S P O.
form of N3 - I'd hate for anything to be unclear because we are not
sure what N3 means exactly.
If thats the case, there is very little difference between the two,
and there may well be an advantage to going with a format that N3
processers can slurp in directly.
If:
o DanC were to propose a way of augmenting "S P O." to represent
anonymous nodes.
o We have an issue #rdfms-xmllang questioning representing the xml:lang
attribute as part of the literal. If the outcome of that lang
attributes are part of the literal value then we'll augment this
syntax to include a lang attribute in a literal.
would that meet our needs?
Brian
Received on Wednesday, 30 May 2001 12:50:50 UTC