W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: opinions on comment DB-9?

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:09:41 +0100
Message-ID: <4E9C9995.6090807@epimorphics.com>
To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org


On 17/10/11 21:50, Axel Polleres wrote:
> Another comment that seems to need discussion:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2011Sep/0004.html
>
>  Here, a proposal is made for bootstrapping prefixes by allowing to
> reuse prefix definitions in later prefix definitions. I don't find
> anything in my records whether this has been discussed yet, but my
> impression is that, though an interesting proposal, this may be too
> late in the process. Will such redefinition of prefixes be allowed in
> RDF1.1?

"Redefinition" is the wrong word:

PREFIX ex: <http://example/1>
PREFIX ex: <http://example/2>

It's legal in SPARQL 1.0 and (implied) in Turtle.

David is asking for definition using earlier prefix declarations.

The published RDF-WG WD is:

http://www.w3.org/2010/01/Turtle/#sec-grammar-grammar

and so the current state is "no".

	Andy

>
> Axel
>
>
Received on Monday, 17 October 2011 21:10:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:46 GMT