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

Re: ACTION 2001-08-24#9 : issues with containers

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2001 10:09:45 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010904100732.035f89a0@joy.songbird.com>
To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 12:12 PM 8/30/01 -0700, pat hayes wrote:
>I understand that, but that still leaves open the issue that I was 
>raising, which is: given that it doesn't have the properties contiguous, 
>what does that entail? Are the 'missing' elements really there (but not 
>mentioned), or are they genuinely not there? So in my example, if
>xxx rdf:_1 aaa
>xxx rdf:_3 ccc
>does xxx have two, or at least three, members?

Can the formalism be agnostic about this?  i.e. that the member 
corresponding to rdf:_2 may or may not exist, and if it does exist its 
value is not stated by the above.  In the absence of an rdf:lastThing or 
equivalent, the same being true for any value of rdf:_n not explicitly stated.

#g



------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne                    Baltimore Technologies
Strategic Research              Content Security Group
<Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>    <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
                                 <http://www.baltimore.com>
------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2001 14:49:23 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:39:38 EDT