- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 16:52:47 +0100
- To: Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>
- Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 09:17 AM 10/10/01 -0400, Art Barstow wrote: >On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 08:00:32AM -0500, Dan Connolly wrote: > > Having thought it over, I think the syntax for the model > > theory should be, more or less, n-triples: > > > > An RDF graph is a set of triples <S, P, O>; each > > of S, P, O is a term; a term is either an absolute > > URI reference, a bNode, or a literal. > >+1! Having seen some of the confusion that has arisen, I'm sort-of inclined to agree... > This is so simple and elegant that it makes me want to cry >with joy! ... but I think we should not forget that the graph approach was introduced to avoid the bNode scoping issue. If bNodes are used, then their scope needs to be clearly stated, and I think that some (probably awkward) text will be needed to explain what happens when two separate documents that happen to use the same bNode names are combined and/or asserted simultaneously. #g -- >This just leaves us with the problem of how to define and >constrain RDF/XML ... > >Art >--- ------------------------------------------------------------ Graham Klyne MIMEsweeper Group Strategic Research <http://www.mimesweeper.com> <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com> ------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 10 October 2001 12:25:41 UTC