W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > July to September 2000

Re: Collections (Re: Misleading note about extensibiity ofCollection syntax)

From: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 16:20:14 +0200
Message-ID: <3990171E.48CB9AD0@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
To: Graham Klyne <GK@dial.pipex.com>
CC: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Graham Klyne wrote:
> >rdf:Bag
> >-------
> >(...)
> I agree.  It might even be called rdf:Bag (i.e. syntax-compatible with the
> current spec).

Yes, keeping the class rdf:Bag (which is already a subclass of rdfs:Container) ensures compatibility, so we must keep it. But since Bags have no specificity w.r.t. Containers, that class is not useful anymore. That's why I prefered using rdfs:Container.

> >rdf:Alt
> >-------
> >(...)
> I don't agree here.  I think the term "choice" is unfortunate.  To me, it
> simple implies a union type.  I would be happy with rdf:Alt and rdf:li, in
> syntax and model.

I think I see your point. So I think I would be happy too with rdf:Alt and rdf:li.


> >rdf:Seq
> >-------
> >(...)
> Hmmm, interesting.  I'm not so sure about invoking reification in this
> way.  I'll think about it some more.  Meanwhile, here are two other approaches:
> 
> (1) For an ordered list, I would be content to see "_1", "_2", etc. in the
> syntax (rather than implied by the subject container class and rdf:li).
> 
> (2) Use a LISP-like approach:
> 
>      [<Cons>] --head--> [Item1]
>      [      ]
>      [      ] --tail--> [<Cons>] --head--> [Item2]
>                         [      ]
>                         [      ] --tail--> etc.

The motivation behind the reification mechanism was illustrated in my example :
untill now, I only used Sequences when I needed an order between several similar properties.

I would like to avoid the trouble of having an intermediate node (the Sequence resource),
I'd rather like to specify that the order in the RDF serialization must be kept in the model.
Although reification is a bit cumbersome to handle, an appropriate API could do that for me, anyway.

Furthermore, that reification mechanism allows me to define Sequences as we know them:
simply the order of rdf:li properties.



Pierre-Antoine

--- Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur
    Whatever is said in Latin sounds important.
Received on Tuesday, 8 August 2000 10:08:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:27 GMT