Re: reifying variables

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider (
Date: 02/12/04

  • Next message: Sandro Hawke: "Re: reifying variables"
    From: Sandro Hawke <>
    Subject: Re: reifying variables 
    Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 08:08:30 -0500
    > > > So SWRL makes no claim to get it right, which is okay, but of course
    > > > this means it's not really an "RDF Concrete Syntax", it's an "RDF-Like
    > > > Concrete Syntax."   Not so good.
    > > 
    > > Well, this is probably the best that can be done.
    > In what way is it better to use an "RDF-Like" syntax?  That seems to
    > me like the worst of both world -- all the syntactic beauty and
    > convenience elegance of RDF/XML, plus all the standard-ness of the
    > <blink> tag.
    >   -- sandro
    Technically I don't see any reason to use an RDF syntax whatsoever.
    However, using RDF syntax has appeared to be the price to enter the
    Semantic Web arena.
    I would be much, much happier if the Semantic Web had multiple syntaxes.  I
    have argued this in the past, to no avail, and have even written papers
    proposing multiple-syntax versions of the Semantic Web.  I don't see any
    technical reasons to not go to a multiple-syntax version of the Semantic
    Peter F. Patel-Schneider
    Bell Labs Research

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 02/12/04 EST