Re: Comments on history system descriptive note

Andy wrote:

> All these syntaxes are just different ways of writing the
> edge list of the graph down.  Visual picture of graphs can
> be useful too but they don't scale and they don't do well
> in text emails.  N3 does have a clear(er) syntax and
> can be used in a frame-like way.  Personally, I don't find
> that N-triples scale any better than images of graphs...

I think it is clear that *either* N3 *or* graphical representations are more
intuitive than XML. Wouldn't N3 be easiest in email, wiki, etc. discussions,
esp. where iteration on an example might be required?

It would certainly be the most *direct* approach, unless someone out there has
a WYSIWYG RDF graph editor...

Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 10:25:17 UTC