Triple terms and annotations

[gkellogg]

• Adds parseType=Triple. (Fixes Support for Triple Terms #50).
• Support triple annotations with rdf:annotation and rdf:annotationNodeID. (Fixes Support for Triple Annotations #52).

---

Preview | Diff

[gkellogg]

Some tests:

Ignored Triple Term (no rdf:version)

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
            xmlns:ex="http://example.org/stuff/1.0/"
            xml:base="http://example.org/triples/">
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/">
    <ex:prop rdf:parseType="Triple">
      <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/stuff/1.0/s">
        <ex:p rdf:resource="http://example.org/stuff/1.0/o" />
      </rdf:Description>
    </ex:prop>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

Triple term having IRI subject

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
            xmlns:ex="http://example.org/stuff/1.0/"
            xml:base="http://example.org/triples/"
            rdf:version="1.2">
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/">
    <ex:prop rdf:parseType="Triple">
      <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/stuff/1.0/s">
        <ex:p rdf:resource="http://example.org/stuff/1.0/o" />
      </rdf:Description>
    </ex:prop>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

Results in:

<http://example.org/> <http://example.org/stuff/1.0/prop> <<(<http://example.org/stuff/1.0/s> <http://example.org/stuff/1.0/p> <http://example.org/stuff/1.0/o>)>> .

Recursive triple term

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
            xmlns:ex="http://example.org/stuff/1.0/"
            xml:base="http://example.org/triples/"
            rdf:version="1.2">
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/">
    <ex:prop rdf:parseType="Triple">
      <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/stuff/1.0/s">
        <ex:p rdf:parseType="Triple">
          <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/stuff/1.0/s2">
            <ex:p2 rdf:resource="http://example.org/stuff/1.0/o2" />
          </rdf:Description>
        </ex:p>
      </rdf:Description>
    </ex:prop>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

Results in:

<http://example.org/> <http://example.org/stuff/1.0/prop>
  <<(<http://example.org/stuff/1.0/s> <http://example.org/stuff/1.0/p>
    <<(<http://example.org/stuff/1.0/s2> <http://example.org/stuff/1.0/p2> <http://example.org/stuff/1.0/o2>
    )>>
  )>> .

Annotation on literal with IRI reifier

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
         xmlns:ex="http://example.org/stuff/1.0/"
         xml:base="http://example.org/triples/">
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/">
    <ex:prop rdf:annotation="http://example.org/triple1">blah</ex:prop>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

Results in:

@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix ex: <http://example.org/stuff/1.0/> .
<http://example.org/> ex:prop "blah" .

<http://example.org/> ex:prop "blah" ~<http://example.org/triple1> .

Annotation on literal with BNode reifier

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
         xmlns:ex="http://example.org/stuff/1.0/"
         xml:base="http://example.org/triples/">
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/">
    <ex:prop rdf:annotationNodeID="triple1">blah</ex:prop>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

Results in:

@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix ex: <http://example.org/stuff/1.0/> .
<http://example.org/> ex:prop "blah" .

<http://example.org/> ex:prop "blah" ~ _:triple1 .

[TallTed]

The RDF 1.2 XML construction seems odd, given that the serialization is called RDF/XML, not XML.

I would expect either RDF 1.2 XML or, more likely, RDF/XML 1.2.

This might want its own issue.

[gkellogg]

In 1.1, it was "RDF 1.1 XML Syntax", and the title of this version is "RDF 1.2 XML Syntax". We did shorten it to "RDF 1.2 XML" in this one place, and it could be "RDF 1.2 XML Syntax".

Before that, it was "RDF/XML Syntax Specification", so there is precedent for reverting the naming scheme, but I rather prefer it this way. We could change this to "RDF 1.2 XML Syntax", though, to be more consistent.

IRIC, RDF/XML is an informal name for RDF xxx XML Syntax.

[TallTed]

I see.

I suggest that (versionless, i.e., including all versions) RDF/XML be treated as an informal/short name for (versionless, i.e., including all versions) RDF xxx XML Syntax, and that (version specific) RDF/XML xxx be treated as an informal/short name for (version specific) RDF xxx XML Syntax.

I feel like without Syntax, RDF xxx XML (which does occur twice in this paragraph, and once circa line 1205) will be more confusing than not.

[gkellogg]

I'll change to RDF 1.2 XML Syntax throughout, to be consistent. If the group feels like changing the naming scheme, we can come back to that.

[TallTed]

Is there any logic to the order of these "syntax names"? I wonder why not this —

Suggested change

	<code>RDF Description ID about annotation annotationNodeID datatype li nodeID parseType resource version</code>
	<code>about annotation annotationNodeID datatype Description ID li nodeID parseType RDF resource version</code>

[gkellogg]

I didn't see a need to re-do the ordering, just to insert the new terms in an appropriate place. The original authors were probably looking to separate the capitalized terms from the lower-case terms.

[TallTed]

Oh, I see, it's case-sensitive alpha-ordering. I hate it, but I'll live with it.