- 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