- 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