On May 28, 2008, at 12:51 PM, Michael Schneider wrote: [snip] > These syntax related uses of lists can IMO be clearly distinguished > from > custom usage. In particular, the currently applied method of a > "canonical > parsing process" in the reverse RDF mapping can first translate graphs > matching these forms into the respective functional syntax > expressions, and > then delete them from the source graph.Afterwards, all remaining > uses f > list vocabulary are regarded as custom use. This sort of punning has been done in Pellet for years. I believe I've proposed it a couple of times already :) [snip] > I, personally, would appreciate to be able to model things like > this... not > only in OWL Full. :-) Using rdf:list for modeling is, IMHO, always a mistake of some sort (after all, they are *not* lists in the standard sense since you don't have, e.g., transitive closure). Your example is a good example of what not to do (IMHO). However, this is pretty common. Better to discourage it by whinging than by fiat. Cheers, Bijan.Received on Friday, 30 May 2008 01:16:45 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:04 UTC