W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > December 2001

RE: ISSUES: DAML+OIL issues/experience/changes

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:24:29 -0000
To: "Mike Dean" <mdean@bbn.com>
Cc: <www-archive@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDCELMCCAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

I think daml:collection parse type is probably a mistake.

1: There is an adequate (not perfect) syntax for collections in rdf, e.g.
<rdf:Bag>. daml:colleciton looks like N.I.H. in the face of this.

2: daml:collection with its lisp/prolog like construction is very biased
towards one groups of implementors at the expense of other types of
implementors.

3: the cons-cell list data model has no semantic justification.

Anyway daml:collection should be defined as a qname not a hard-coded string.

Jeremy


>
Received on Wednesday, 19 December 2001 09:24:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:15 GMT