Ivan Mikhailov wrote:
After 7 days of discussion, are there any volunteers to implement this
proposal? Or you specify the wish and I should implement it (and
Kingsley should pay) for an unclear purpose? Sorry, no.
I should remind one more time: without two scheduled implementations
right now and two complete implementations at the CR time, the
discussion is just for fun.
AFAIK - 'The RDF Semantics as stated works fine with triples which have
any kind of syntactic node in any position in any combination.' - it's
only the common serializations which define + cater for a subset of
'RDF' and prevent literal subjects.
For a long time people have been telling me that RDF/XML is not RDF, if
people have built their triple/quad stores on the understanding that
specific serializations of RDF define RDF itself then..?
I'd hope that RDF/XML and other common serializations don't change - but
I'd also hope that in the near future we will have an RDF
serialization which does handle literal subjects (& predicates) - at
that time it will be a business decision for each company to decide
whether to use and support it or not.
Best,
Nathan
