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

RE: Quick reviews of new abstract syntax?

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 15:39:27 +0100
To: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BHEGLCKMOHGLGNOKPGHDKEJFCAAA.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


Thanks for opening a can of worms :) ... comment declined.

Jeremy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jos De_Roo [mailto:jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com]
> Sent: 05 November 2002 14:54
> To: jjc@hpl.hp.com
> Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Quick reviews of new abstract syntax?
> 
> 
> 
> > Anyone up to doing a very quick review of the modified abstract syntax
> ...
> >
> >
> http://sealpc09.cnuce.cnr.it/jeremy/RDF-concepts/2002-11-05/rdf-co
> ncepts.html
> 
> 
> re: #section-Graph-syntax
> one comment I have is on
>   The subject may not be an RDF literal.
> 
> for a plain literal maybe OK, but a typed literal
> can be a perfect subject
> e.g.
>   "10"^^xsd:int xsd:int "10".
> 
> -- ,
> Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 5 November 2002 09:40:02 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:53:58 EDT