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

Re: About Refactoring RDF/XML Syntax Rivision 1.43

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2001 17:29:47 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010906172605.03bd8070@joy.songbird.com>
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 02:54 PM 9/6/01 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> > 6. More than one rdf:RDF
> >
> > Is it legal to have more than one rdf:RDF elements in one XML document?
>Yes.
> > Is it different from having all rdf:Description in one rdf:RDF?
>No.
>
>At least I think so, we probably should make this explicit if that is what
>people think. In particular it suggests that using an ID in one rdf:RDF
>element in the file, prohibits the use of the same ID in some other rdf:RDF
>element.

Interesting question.  I agree multiple <rdf:RDF>s should be legal.

But are they the same as al the RDF in a single element?  I'm not so 
sure.  I'd think that separate <rdf:RDF> elements would generate different 
RDF graphs.  They might be used in different contexts, or different modes 
(e.g. assertion vs query).

I think it would be safer, in the long run, to preserve the separate 
graphs, and allow an application to merge them if it that serves its purpose.

#g


------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne                    Baltimore Technologies
Strategic Research              Content Security Group
<Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>    <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
                                 <http://www.baltimore.com>
------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Thursday, 6 September 2001 12:45:04 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:39:40 EDT