W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2003

Re: RDFS rdfs:List/first/rest/nil updated

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 15:32:24 +0100
Message-ID: <3F311178.1050406@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
CC: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

Dan Brickley wrote:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-schema-20030117/#ch_list
> Per http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-11
> "Lists are not well formed" the RDFS spec now has reworded text for 
> the collections vocab, following Peter's suggestion.
> See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003AprJun/0277.html
> for the discussion that led to this text.
> I need some advice:
>  - what we agreed w/ Peter was text for 'rdf:first' and the assumption 
>    that similar changes would be needed for 'at least' rdf:List,
>    rdf:rest.
>  - I've tried to make such changes, could do with a sanity check 
>    especially rdf:nil seems awkward.

This looked ok to me.  I did find the note at the end of the intro to 
5.2 awkward, but have failed in my attempt to write something better.

Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2003 10:33:11 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:59:34 EDT