Re: rdfms-syntax-incomplete

On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Patrick Stickler wrote:

>
> On 2002-06-26 14:19, "ext Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > At the f2f one of the postponed issues that I wished to advocate reopening
> > was:
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-syntax-incomplete
> >
> > In particular, given the amount of change we have made I think a small change
> > to
> > rectify the bnode serialization problem should be considered.
> >
> > However we were out of time, and so I have decided to raise this by e-mail.
> >
> > This is primarily motivated for me by Jena development.
> > Within Jena we have repeated user requirement to enable round-tripping.
> >
> > e.g. one of our summer students yesterday said words like: "we use N-triple as
> > our transport becuase bNodes are important."
> >
> > Since we are not proposing N-triple as a standard, we do have some obligation
> > to
> > make RDF/XML useable.
> >
> > I propose that we should modify the RDF/XML syntax to permit bNode labels
> > "_:foo" wherever we currently permit URI refs.
>
> If we go this route, I propose we use UUIDs to ensure against
> accidental collisions between systems or sessions.

No! That would make people think they're just some kind of globally
unique URI thing. The more inter-file collision between these, the
better, I think.



-- 
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk
...You're visualising the _duck_ taped over my _mouth_..?

Received on Wednesday, 26 June 2002 13:03:54 UTC