[sc34wg3] CTM - Notation for subject identifiers / locators

[Lars Heuer]

Hi all,

Comments against 0975 <http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/sc34/open/0975.htm>

Not a big issue, but why does Kyoto propose to use "=" as indicator
for a subject identifier and "~" for a subject locator? TMQL uses
exactly the opposite notation.

Why do we need a indicator for subject identifier at all? In the
current CTM draft every IRI is an subject identifier iff it is not
prefixed by "=".

IMO the "=" for subject locators is nicer, because it indicates that
the resource *is* (=) the subject.

Proposal:
- Use "=" for subject locators
- Remove the "~" as prefix for IRIs, any IRI without a prefix is a
subject identifier


Best regards,
Lars
-- 
http://www.semagia.com