Re: N3 and N-Triples (was: RDF in HTML: Approaches)

On 2002-06-03 20:26, "ext Peter F. Patel-Schneider"
<pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote:

> 
> From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
> Subject: N3 and N-Triples (was: RDF in HTML: Approaches)
> Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 11:42:58 -0500
> 
>> 
>> 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.
>> 
>> Ugh, what FUD. N-Triples is the only decent standardized interchange
>> format for RDF. RDF/XML is both difficult for machines to parse and for
>> humans to write. N-Triples at least gets one side of the equation right
>> (N3 gets the other).
>> 
>> Perhaps we will be more "interoperable" if we stick with RDF/XML, but I
>> think that's rather meaningless since it will only be adopted by the
>> tiny community we already have. If we want more people to adopt RDF
>> we're going to have accept that the old syntax is flawed and move on.
>> 
>> --
>> Aaron Swartz [http://www.aaronsw.com]
> 
> In other words,
> 
> ``Let's move even further from the other W3C standards.''
> 
> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> Bell Labs Research

Exactly. We should simply fix RDF/XML, keeping it as XML,
a soon as we can -- though we can't do it under the
RDF Core WG's present charter.

Personally, I miss short-refs. They would have allowed us the
ability to define a more keyboard friendly representation which
still parsed as full XML according to the more verbose syntax.

Oh well... I guess *something* had to go to make XML reasonably
implementable ;-)

Patrick

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com

Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2002 02:28:28 UTC