Re: An observation about rdf:Seq

>>>Graham Klyne said:
> 
> In constructing code to process containers, I am finding it difficult to 
> reliably process members of an rdf:Seq in the sequence order.
> 
> By comparison, ordered processing of the rdf:parseType="Collection" form is 
> easy.
> 
> Which makes me wonder if there's a case for deprecating rdf:Seq.   (I see 
> no problem with rdf:Bag or rdf:Alt in this respect, because there's no 
> complete ordering to worry about.)

No.  I do not see the point of re-opening that closed issue at this
stage.  We decided a long time ago not to design a *replacement*
container mechanism for Seq, Bag and Alt.  I would say that rdf:Seq
is the most used of the constructs of RDF/XML outside the basic node
and property element and attribute parts.

I see rdf:parseType="Collection" as a complex mechanism more
appropriate for layering, working in a logic or inference style.

Dave