W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > October to December 1998

Re: W3C RDF Model and Syntax Specification enters Last Call

From: Eric J. Miller <emiller@oclc.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 14:22:47 -0500
Message-Id: <365C5906.F77593E0@oclc.org>
To: cowan@locke.ccil.org, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
John,

Thank you for your comments regarding the RDF Model and Syntax
specification.

RDF Model and Syntax had a requirement that an RDF instance be
interpretable (as properties and values) without recourse to the
schema.  As you have noted, the implicit Bag (or Seq) only works
"provided proper definitions of containers and typed nodes exist
somewhere."  This point, however, conflicts with our requirement.

Sincerely,

Ralph Swick, W3C Metadata Activity Leader
Eric Miller, Bob Schloss, RDF Model and Syntax Chairs


> From: John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>
> Message-Id: <199810110350.XAA09423@locke.ccil.org>
> To: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
> Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1998 23:50:25 -0400 (EDT)
> In-Reply-To:
<72B89459DD2BD211B5CD0000F840094E0C2D8A@oa3-server.dev.oclc.org> from
"Miller,Eric" at Oct 10, 98 09:26:47 am
> Subject: Re: W3C RDF Model and Syntax Specification enters Last Call
>
> > On behalf of the W3C RDF Model and Syntax Working Group it gives us
great
> > pleasure to announce "Last Call" for comments on the RDF Model and
Syntax
> > Specification, version 1 [RDFMS].
> >
> > With the publication of this draft, the RDF Model and Syntax
Specification
> > enters "last call." The last call period will end on October 23,
1998.
> >
> > Comments on this specification may be sent to
www-rdf-comments@w3.org.  The
> > archive of public comments is available at
> > http://www.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments.
>
> I would like to propose a small syntax extension.  I realize that
> this is the last call for doing so, but I think the advantage would be

> considerable.
>
> The proposal is to allow an "obj" (rule 6.2) to be
> a "member" (rule 6.28) without an intervening "inlineItem"
> (rule 6.30).  No change in semantics would be implied.  Doing so
> would allow, e.g. Seqs to be embedded directly within Seqs
> without otherwise useless "rdf:li" elements.
>
> It would also mean that *any* document type not involving mixed
> content could be walked by an RDF engine, provided proper
> definitions of containers and typed nodes exist somewhere.
> This seems like a real advantage.
>
> --
> John Cowan                                      cowan@ccil.org
>                 e'osai ko sarji la lojban
Received on Wednesday, 25 November 1998 14:23:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:26 GMT