W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2002

RE: addressing requirements around daml:collection (rdfms-seq-rep resentation)

From: Ronald Daniel <rdaniel@interwoven.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 15:52:44 -0700
Message-ID: <E7244F2AFCE1C644BD0B1CCE65C84B248918C1@xchanger3.interwoven.com>
To: "'Dave Beckett'" <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, Lynn Andrea Stein <las@olin.edu>
Dave Beckett said:
> >>>Dan Connolly said:
> >  (does anybody in the WG know of anybody in
> >   the general RDF implementation community
> >   who hasn't already added support for daml:collection?)
> > ...
> Anyone who has implemented RDF M&S and no more will likely fail on
> daml:collection.  That includes PRISM, Dublin Core, Mozilla and so
> on.

To be more specific - PRISM does not use daml:collection. People
writing PRISM code might do so on top of a parser that understood
daml:collection. But for those of us still using older parsers like
Megginson's RDFFilter, our code will throw a syntax error since
daml:collection is an unknown parse type.

I've been meaning to move to a more up-to-date RDF parser. If I get
the chance to look into this more I'll let you know although
if someone wanted to use it in the middle of a PRISM description 

> I feel like we should be very cautious adding changes late in the
> (WG) day to RDF 1.0.  The changes we made have been out in the
> RDF community for a while (namespace prefixes, aboutEach*).

Massive agreement.

Received on Monday, 22 April 2002 18:53:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:57 UTC