- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 21:43:01 -0000
- To: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>
- Cc: "RDF-IG" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>
> i reread the primer quickly and I don't see anything about "keywords" Try: http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Notation3 For example, you could have :x has :y of :z, which if you got rid of the colons would be x has y of z. Actually, I don't like that, because what if you had ":hasAuthor", then it doesn't make grammatical sense (e.g. "has hasAuthor of", or even worse "is :hasAuthorOf of"); but TimBL said that is optional (I suppose to make it a bit more legible to humans). I'd take 'em out if it were up to me, and let the properties do the talking :-) > But your right, if the intent is to allow any key words whatsoever > and just have the parser ignore them, and if that is more important > than worrying about the messy redundancy, then the colon would > be necessary. I think the colon is there due to the fact that it fits in neater with the namespace spec. I wouldn't make much sense to have:- @prefix <URI> Because you would be expecting something to bind. Maybe if the ns alias (prefix) to bind were in quotes, ala.:- @prefix "myprefix:" <URI> then you could have @prefix "" <URI> But it gets a bit messy. I don't know really, I think it's alright the way it is. "Too many cooks spoil the broth", and all that :-) -- Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer @prefix : <http://infomesh.net/2001/01/n3terms/#> . [ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] has :homepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
Received on Saturday, 20 January 2001 16:43:51 UTC