Re: #rdf-containers-syntax-ambiguity, #rdf-containers-syntax-vs-schema

Art Barstow wrote:

> > Another weakness of the original proposal is that it is not clear what
> > tripes to generate for the following case:
> >
> >   <rdf:Bag rdf:_1="1", rdf:_2="2"/>
> >     <rdf:li>?</rdf:li>
> >   </rdf:Bag>
> 
> I don't quite understand this issue as the above appears
> to be illegal RDF (even as a typedNode).  Are you suggesting
> the grammar be changed to make this legal?

I was in too much of a hurry with my last message.

I think it matches:

[6.13] typedNode      ::= '<' typeName idAboutAttr? bagIdAttr? propAttr* '/>'
                         | '<' typeName idAboutAttr? bagIdAttr? propAttr* '>'
                               propertyElt* '</' typeName '>'


Brian