- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 16:46:20 +0100
- To: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- CC: "Graham Klyne <GK" <GK@ninebynine.org>, RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org
I am worried about Pat's proposals for *any* RDF list semantics. I had believed that we were going to provide a list syntax, and leave the semantics to WebOnt. Pat's current proposal appears to have three unfortunate features: EQUALITY ======== _:l rdf:first <a> . _:l rdf:first <b> . <a> <foo> <val> . entails <b> <foo> <val> . INFINITY ======== RDF closures of the empty rdf graph are infinite. CONTRADICTION ============= The following rdf graph has no interpretations: rdf:nil rdf:first <foo> . (I note that we will have datatype errors in RDF graphs soon, but that feels to me like a significantly more limited style of 'contradiction'). On the basis of these three features, which are more characteristic of OWL than RDF I suggest we ask WebOnt to handle List semantics. Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 10 October 2002 11:45:05 UTC