- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 31 Oct 2002 16:23:33 -0600
- To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Cc: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>, ext Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
On Thu, 2002-10-31 at 14:31, Patrick Stickler wrote: > > > [Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690, patrick.stickler@nokia.com] > > > To me, using "^^" makes it clear that ^^ is a syntactic thing > > whose semantics are in fact equivalent to "^" except that > > the formal triples representation is different. > > > > So Jos, you can if you want dismantle the triple into two. > > You will have a semantically equivalent graph. > > Well surprise surprise. I guess my suspicions about ^^ were correct. Hmmm... I wonder. I think either TimBL misspoke or you're reading more into it than he meant. But I can't reach him to confirm just now; in any case... > I reiterate my opposition to the use of ^^ in the abstract syntax. > > A typed literal node may *not* be "dismantled" into > additional triples, even if it might be deemed to be semantically > equivalent to an expansion into a bnode with datatype property > (and I am not convinced that it is). > > If an application wishes to define rules to infer those additional > triples, fine, but the ^^ delimiter does not function in any way > like ^ in N3. > > I would like either for the delimiter to be removed entirely or > for there to be an explicit statement that such "dismantling" > of the typed literal node is not licensed by the RDF specs. It's clear enough to me that the dismantling isn't licensed, but I don't mind a little redundancy. I find it hard to see how the delimiter makes any difference; I remain satisfied with delegating to editorial discretion (even if that means taking ^^ out). -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 31 October 2002 17:24:25 UTC