W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: [closed] hendler-01 literals in parsetype collection

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 07:58:24 -0500
Message-Id: <p05200f05baa8a5207597@[]>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org, Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>

At 10:04 +0000 3/27/03, Brian McBride wrote:
>Hi Jim,
>I've added the issue to the postponed issues list:
>   http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfxml-literals-in-collections
>keeping the reference to the original message raising the issue and 
>adding "see also" links to both the webont submission and Jim's 
>Jim, please could you check that this is captured to your satisfaction.

yes, that looks good, and I therefore accept the decision of the RDF Core WG.

>At 21:31 26/03/2003 -0500, Jim Hendler wrote:
>>If I use current RDF constructs I have no way to produce this as a 
>>closed list.
>You might want to amend this statement.  I think your point is that 
>the syntax required is ugly, not that it can't be done, Right?

Sorry, what I meant to say in this sentence was

If I use the other current RDF list constructs (i.e. not including 
collection) then I cannot produce this as a closed list.

(i.e. seq, bag, etc. are designed so that elements can be added to 
them, collection is designed to be "all and only" the members of some 

So this sentence was meant to address the nature of the other 
constructs, not the ugliness of collection for datatypes.  Apologies 
for not being clearer before.


Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-731-3822 (Cell)
Received on Thursday, 27 March 2003 08:02:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:15:20 UTC