W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > February 2000

RE: SV: A certain difficulty - lack of action!

From: Jeff Sussna <jeff.sussna@quokka.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 13:11:48 -0800
Message-ID: <E19A882C6CD5D211A8A70008C75B6AF40122CFDC@pcmail.quokka.com>
To: "'Gabe Beged-Dov'" <begeddov@jfinity.com>, Jeff Sussna <jeff.sussna@quokka.com>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
I think what you're proposing is analogous to the "typedNode" abbreviation
in the current RDF syntax. I think it is a valid and useful shortcut for the
syntax proposed by Sergey. The nice thing about Sergey's version, though, is
that it emphasizes the first-class nature of the property by referencing it
via URI just like any other object. It's also about as generic and basic an
expression of the core of the RDF model as one can get.


-----Original Message-----
From: Gabe Beged-Dov [mailto:begeddov@jfinity.com]
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2000 12:37 PM
To: Jeff Sussna
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Subject: Re: SV: A certain difficulty - lack of action!

Jeff Sussna wrote:
> Fabulous! This syntax would address my foremost complaint with RDF: the
> model is property-centric but the syntax really isn't. The "canonical"
> description format is really a shortcut of its own, and one that obscures
> the basic property-centric quality of RDF. Sergey's proposed syntax is
> (IMHO) just what the doctor ordered.
> Jeff

If we're going to be property centric then I would promote the
predicate to the element name position. You would then have:

  <predQname subject="[URI]" object="[URI]"/>
  <predQname subject="[URI]">[PCDATA]</predQname>

Received on Monday, 28 February 2000 16:06:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:22 UTC