What I Want in RDF 2.0

Position Paper for W3C RDF Next Steps Workshop, June 26-27, 2010, Stanford, CA, USA
David Booth, Ph.D.
Cleveland Clinic (contractor)
Latest version of this document: http://dbooth.org/2010/rdf2/

1. Standardize a rules language based on SPARQL CONSTRUCT.  (For example, see SPIN.)  Even if other rules languages are ultimately standardized as well, a SPARQL-based rules language is a no brainer, since RDF users already know SPARQL.  If such a rules language were based strictly on SPARQL CONSTRUCT -- nothing more and nothing less -- the standardization effort would be minimal.

2. Standardize an XML Schema-friendly serialization.  And of course it must support named graphs.  TriX is the most obvious candidate.  Because RDF/XML is the only standards-based serialization for RDF, people feel compelled to use it, in spite of how awful it is.

3. Permit literals as subjects.  Although there are work-arounds, they add unnecessary complication, confusion and debate.

4. Named graphs.  Being standardized will help push tools to uniformly support them.