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

Re: rdf:li ?? in primer

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:51:27 -0600
Message-Id: <p05111b1aba1a76fe0223@[]>
To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

>  >>>pat hayes said:
>>  Frank, your prose in section 4.1 of the primer mentions rdf:li as a
>>  convenience element generic XML version of container membership
>>  properties. My recollection is that we had decided to deprecate or
>>  even forbid rdf:li in this way, however (??) on the grounds that
>>  there was in general no way to assign numerical properties to the
>>  instances of rdf:li.
>>  We ought to get this straight one way or the other. If we still have
>>  rdf:li, can anyone tell me how to map RDF/XML into a graph?
>>  Another matter, if we keep rdf:li, then your reference to 'list
>>  element' is potentially confusing given the use of 'list structure'
>>  in the next section to refer to something completely different.
>I think you are a bit confused Pat.

Yes, I was.

I have to say, this idea of a 'syntax name' that isn't actually a 
name *is* very confusing, particularly when it sure LOOKS like a 
name.  Im still puzzled about how it's supposed to actually work. 
Seems to me that the actual graph formed from some RDF/XML which uses 
rdf:li can vary from moment to moment at the whim of the parser, 
since it depends on some ordering that isnt specified in the syntax.

>  rdf:li is a syntax name; it has
>never been an RDF property, class or whatever.  We have thus never
>deprecated or forbidden it.

Well, its ours, right? I mean, its in our namespace? It starts with 
'rdf:', after all.

>Just to be clear; RDF as we have revised has changed two names in the
>RDF namespace
>   rdf:aboutEach rdf:aboutEachPrefix - syntax only devices, now removed
>(we've added some of course)
>The definitive words for rdf: things:
>   5.1 The RDF Namespace
>   http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#section-Namespace

OK, thanks.

>   [[Syntax names - not concepts
>     RDF Description ID about bagID parseType resource li nodeID
>     datatype
>   ]]

Now Im puzzled about something else. I've been using rdf:Datatype as 
a class name. Is that a mistake??


PS. BTW, you say there that 'any other names are not defined and 
SHOULD generate a warning when encountered' which seems a bit strong. 
That means for example that any OWL vocabulary is going to generate 
an RDF warning. In fact, any RDFS vocabulary is going to generate an 
RDF warning.
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola              			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501           				(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ai.uwf.edu	          http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
s.pam@ai.uwf.edu   for spam
Received on Monday, 9 December 2002 11:51:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:54:03 UTC