- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 31 Oct 2002 00:58:40 -0600
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
briefly... On Wed, 2002-10-30 at 17:00, pat hayes wrote: [...] > Equality, yes; but the proposed list semantics doesn't impose > equality. I assumed it did; I don't know what to think now that you say this... I'm not sure what you mean by "real lists" if it doesn't involve a functional rdf:first. > What would be the code problem of assuming that lists > always exist? On pragmatic grounds, I don't have a problem. cwm makes this assumption, for example. But on theoretical grounds... [...] > >I think it's important that semantically, the RDF layer > >is just the existential-conjuctive fragment of FOL. > > OK, fine: I agree that has a nice solid feel to it. But then we can't > have lists. Lists aren't even fully expressible in FOL, so I did > rather wonder when they got absorbed into RDF. There is that. I still think having the short-hand list syntax is a good thing, and that it's usable in WebOnt. I wish I could collect my thoughts in a convincing message, but I think maybe the phone will be necessary. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 31 October 2002 01:58:21 UTC