- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 21:36:18 +0200
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
While Brian's summary is helpful, I keep wondering whether we are comparing the worst that came out of the tidy camp, with the worst that came out of the untidy camp. Personally I like the syntactic transform on input, which adds a bnode into the graph in the place of each untyped literal, and then another arc. The resulkting graph is understood with tidy literal semantics. The RDF/XML doc now has untidy literal semantics. It's pretty minimal work for the tool builders; there is a difficult transitional phase for RDF apps built on top of the tools. Tool builders may need to support transitional deprecated APIs that make the bnode-arc-literal combination just look like a literal. Mandating the transform and then tidy semantics should make it relatively easy to ensure that the community does the same thing (rather than variations on a theme). Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 24 September 2002 15:37:51 UTC