- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 15:09:07 +0200
- To: Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com, phayes@ai.uwf.edu
- Cc: connolly@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Dan, > > would it break your mental model if the above N-triples-like > syntax was > modified to be: > > terms: > constant (URIs w/fragids) > string literals > bnodes (existentially quantified variables) > statement: > term constant term. > formula: > statement* If we're talking about triples here where literals are acting as subjects, then we need to base the triples on node identity, right? I.e. (presuming nodes with identical uriref labels are "merged") statement = subject predicate object '.' subject = uriref | ( nodeID ':' literal ) | nodeID predicate = uriref object = subject | literal Note that only literal nodes that act as subjects must be specified for nodeID, otherwise, just use the literal. Eh? Of course, since statements are not themselves reified in NTriples, one can't qualify them ;-) Patrick
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2001 08:09:16 UTC