W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2001

Re: RDF/XML Syntax Internal Working Draft V1.23

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 15:51:39 +0100
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
CC: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
Message-ID: <28893.999010299@tatooine.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>
>>>jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com said:
> 4.1. Infoset Notation
> [...]
> > + One or one of preceding term
>            ^^^more

OK

> [...]
> > 4.4 Production description (was 6.3 description)
> > element([namespace name]=rdf-ns,
> >     [local name]="Description",
> >     [attributes]=set(idAboutAttr?, bagIdAttr?, propertyAttr*),
> >     [children]=list())
> > | element([namespace name]=rdf-ns,
> >     [local name]="Description",
> >     [attributes]=set(idAboutAttr?, bagIdAttr?, propertyAttr*),
> >     [children]=list(propertyElt+))
> 
> I was wondering if there was any difference by saying
>   element([namespace name]=rdf-ns,
>       [local name]="Description",
>       [attributes]=set(idAboutAttr?, bagIdAttr?, propertyAttr*),
>       [children]=list(*))
> 
> and the same for 4.5 and 4.6

I actually expanded that from the more compact form and the reason
for that is twofold.

Firstly, empty elements in XML use a different form than elements
with content and having this explict makes it clear which one are
talking about.  From an implementation point of view, the
empty/non-empty cases are an important distinction.

Secondly, we can use the answers from the empty-elements decisions
that Jan wrote for property elements, to directly write down the
answers to what statements are generated from the grammar:
  http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-empty-property-elements

but maybe in the next version

Dave
Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2001 10:51:40 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:38:48 EDT