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

Re: Question about rdf:parseType="Collection" syntax

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 17:30:29 +0000
To: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
cc: RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <21795.1039455029@hoth.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

>>>Graham Klyne said:
> My apologies if this has already been discussed.
> Is it intended that the syntax provide a way to describe a list that 
> contains literals?


> If so, how does that work?
> If not, that seems like a significant omission, that significantly limits 
> the utility of the new list construct.  I suppose one can always write out 
> the list "longhand" with rdf:List, rdf:first, rdf:rest and rdf:nil.

As you know very well, rdf:parseType="Collection" was asked of RDF
Core, by WebONT to work the same way as daml:Collection.  The latter
always, and only, allowed a collection of nodes to be listed as content.

It is not a significant omission at all since you can always list any
triples you want; it is (yet another) abbreviation for triples.

Received on Monday, 9 December 2002 12:33:00 UTC

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