- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 20:47:26 +0000
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Yes, I agree. This is a rather bizarre case.
(Would it be easiest on implementers to say that the effect of using rdf:li
as a typednode is undefined?)
#g
--
At 06:39 PM 11/14/01 +0000, Brian McBride wrote:
>In the resolution of issues
>
> http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdf-containers-syntax-ambiguity
> http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdf-containers-syntax-vs-schema
>
>the WG decided to allow <rdf:li> elements as typed nodes. This was at the
>time an arbritary decision, made primarily to ensure that there was a
>definite answer.
>
>There has been implementor feedback that this was not a good decision.
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2001JulSep/0159.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Aug/0122.html
>
>The WG will also be considering by Friday issue:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-rdf-names-use
>
>where it is proposed to disallow names from the RDF namespace in
>inappropriate contexts, e.g. rdf:Description not be allowed on a property
>element.
>
>I propose
>
> o Use of rdf:li is an error
> o
> http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-containers-syntax-vs-schema/test005.rdf
> be deleted
> o that the test cases for rdfms-rdf-names-use should illustrate this error.
>
>Brian
------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
__
/\ \
/ \ \
/ /\ \ \
/ / /\ \ \
/ / /__\_\ \
/ / /________\
\/___________/
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2001 16:10:48 UTC