Re: N3 vs. XML

Drew McDermott wrote:
> 
> Following down the pointers provided by Jos de Roo, I am beginning to
> understand N3 a lot better --- and RDF a bit worse.  The key
> innovation of N3 is *contexts*, indicated by braces.  To quote from
> http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/Primer.html ---
> 
>    Let's call a set of RDF statements a context. In a context,
> 
>         The statements are all independent, in that you can remove any
>         of the statements and the rest are still true.

They may not make sense though - what about collections? If you remove
the rdf:type property then the collection isn't valid RDF. If you remove
the rdf:_2 property leaving only _1 and _3 then I guess the collection
isn't valid. So the triples are not all independent. This is a problem
of RDF in general, not N3 though.

>         The order of the
>         statements does not in fact matter.  There is no such thing as
>         the same statement occuring twice any more than you can be a
>         person twice.

Regards,

David Allsopp.

-- 
/d{def}def/u{dup}d[0 -185 u 0 300 u]concat/q 5e-3 d/m{mul}d/z{A u m B u
m}d/r{rlineto}d/X -2 q 1{d/Y -2 q 2{d/A 0 d/B 0 d 64 -1 1{/f exch d/B
A/A z sub X add d B 2 m m Y add d z add 4 gt{exit}if/f 64 d}for f 64 div
setgray X Y moveto 0 q neg u 0 0 q u 0 r r r r fill/Y}for/X}for showpage

Received on Monday, 21 May 2001 05:32:25 UTC