[oslc-core] Should RDF/XML be MUST?

Arthur Ryman ryman at ca.ibm.com
Wed May 12 08:45:29 EDT 2010


I agree that triples, etc. should be used to clarify the spec for 
implementers. In fact I did just that in a document that describes the 
semantics of the simple query syntax. [1] I also described the translation 
of the query parameters into SPARQL [2].

[1] http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcSimpleQuerySemanticsV1
[2] http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OslcSimpleQuerySparqlV1


Arthur Ryman, PhD, DE

Chief Architect, Project and Portfolio Management

IBM Software, Rational

Markham, ON, Canada | Office: 905-413-3077, Cell: 416-939-5063
Twitter | Facebook | YouTube

Olivier Berger <olivier.berger at it-sudparis.eu>
oslc-core <oslc-core at open-services.net>
05/12/2010 05:08 AM
Re: [oslc-core] Should RDF/XML be MUST?
Sent by:
oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net


Le mardi 11 mai 2010 à 10:18 -0400, Dave a écrit :
> Sorry to raise this old issue again, but I've been getting some new
> feedback that the Core spec should not be so prescriptive (or is it
> proscriptive) about RDF/XML representation.


IMHO, RDF/XML should be a MUST for *implementations*, but for specs
readability by *implementors* (me, you, may grand-ma ;), Turtle or likes
(diagrams ;) may help capturing the semantics and the logic of the

Just in case this wasn't clear in my earlier suggestion in another

Best regards,

Olivier BERGER <olivier.berger at it-sudparis.eu>
http://www-public.it-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/ - OpenPGP-Id: 2048R/5819D7E8
Ingénieur Recherche - Dept INF
Institut TELECOM, SudParis (http://www.it-sudparis.eu/), Evry (France)

Oslc-Core mailing list
Oslc-Core at open-services.net

More information about the Oslc-Core mailing list