- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 13:30:17 -0400
- To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- cc: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
>>>>> "AS" == Aaron Swartz <of Mon, 03 Jun 2002 11:42:58 CDT> writes: AS> On Monday, June 3, 2002, at 01:41 AM, Patrick Stickler wrote: >> I would, thus, not like to see any N3 or NTriples used as primary >> representations for RDF that are interchanged by real systems. >> N3 and NTriples are not standard encodings for interchange. RDF/XML >> is. And that's what folks should be using in a global context. AS> Perhaps we will be more "interoperable" if we stick with RDF/XML, but I AS> think that's rather meaningless since it will only be adopted by the AS> tiny community we already have. If we want more people to adopt RDF AS> we're going to have accept that the old syntax is flawed and move on. This echos what I wrote about 2 weeks ago: the current XML/RDF syntax makes no sense. NTriples are easy to write by hand or translate into from higher-level languages, like F-logic. NTriples can be naturally encoded in XML and exchanged. However, before it is standardized, one must make sure that there are no problems extending NTriples to accommodate Prolog-like rules. (I think there are.) Michael Kifer kifer@cs.stonybrook.edu
Received on Monday, 3 June 2002 13:31:39 UTC