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

Re: Issue http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 15:11:41 +0100
Message-ID: <3B09221D.176C0AFE@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
CC: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org


Dave Beckett wrote:

> 
> In case #1 (empty element) since rdf:ID points to the target
> resource, adding rdf:resource as well would have two statement
> objects which does not make sense.

I'm not following you here Dave.

  <rdf:Description>
    <foo:bar rdf:ID="rs">foobar</foo:bar>
  </rdf:Desscription>

is clearly legal and the rdf:ID attribute defines the URI of the refied
statement the property represents.  The question that arises is whether

  <rdf:Description>
    <foo:bar rdf:resource="http://foo/" rdf:ID="rs"/>
  </rdf:Description>

is legal, with again the rdf:ID attribute defining the URI of the reifed
statement.  It does seem a bit irregular to allow the use of an rdf:ID
attribute to identify the reifed statement in the case where the object
is a literal, but not in the case where it is a resource.  And strictly
speaking, the grammar does not rule it out as the rdf:resource attribute
matches the idAboutAttr? in the production and the rdf:ID attribute
matches the propAttr*.

Brian
Received on Monday, 21 May 2001 10:12:15 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:35:50 EDT