Re: DAML+OIL and the nested element conundrum

[Uche Ogbuji]

> The DAML+OIL reference, as an illustration of the representation of lists
as
> cons pairs, uses the following RDF snippet:
>
> <List>
>  <first>
>   <Thing rdf:resource="#red">
>  </first>
>  <rest>
>   <List>
>    <first>
>     <Thing rdf:resource="#white">
> [...]
>
> The first bit of bad news is that this is not well formed XML.
>
> But even once amended, it probably doesn't mean what the DAML authors
think it
> might.  It seems to me that the following makes more sense:
>
> <List>
>  <first>
>   <Thing rdf:about="#red">
>  </first>
>  <rest>
>   <List>
>    <first>
>     <Thing rdf:about="#white">
> [...]

Anyway, how are we supposed to know what a "List","first", or "rest" is
without some rdf: or DAML: namespace to tell us?  Or is the processor
supposed to infer that anything with this structure is intended to be a list
regardless of the element names?

Cheers,

Tom P