W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > May 2012

Re: Test 0218 : empty lists

From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:29:06 -0700
Message-ID: <CABp3FNJh0zJZXeHu=f-DwioZpBjMtCzPVB=+QAN_qYB7DHFu3A@mail.gmail.com>
To: W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote:

>>
>> That said, using rdf:nil would make sense.  To do so, the object should say:
>>
>>   "first item of the ‘bnode’ array or, if that does not exist,
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#nil"
>
> This is implied in the previous step where it says "next item in the ‘bnode’ array or, if that does not exist, http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#nil". You're right that it's not spelled out explicitly.
>

I'm not sure I agree.  I think the specification doesn't say that and
I don't see it being implied.  That was certainly not the reading I
took when I implemented it.

It is clear that rdf:nil is used as the object for the rdf:rest
predicate triple when you reach the end of your list.

If you don't add the rdf:nil, you just don't the list predicate on the
subject.  Non-existence of that predicate is sufficient to convey the
absence of list items.

-- 
--Alex Milowski
"The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the
inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language
considered."

Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2012 05:29:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 1 May 2012 05:29:36 GMT