- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 10:38:42 -0000
- To: "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Syntactic comments only .... > We > could encode this in N-triples by having two ways to terminate a > triple, so that > > ex:judy ex:age ex:whatever . > > is an asserted triple but > > ex:judy ex:age ex:whatever ; > > is an unasserted triple. I would prefer - <subj> <pred> <obj> . as an unasserted triple. > I confess to having no idea how to represent > something analogous to this in RDF/XML, however. Liar, (or should that be "balls" :) ) You came up with a number of proposals that all seem fine. My early preference is ... > > Another possibility is to allow certain namespaces to be declared to > be dark, so that any triple using a property from a dark namespace is > considered to be unasserted. Again, this does not require any change > to the syntax, but only some extra conventions to be added to the > language. > This could be a namespace prefix rather than the namespace e.g. <rdf:RDF xmlns:eg="http://example.org/" xmlns:egdark="http://example.org/" rdf:darkPrefixes="egdark"> <rdf:Description eg:aserted="foo" egd:unasserted="bar" /> </rdf:RDF> Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2002 05:38:58 UTC