W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > October 2002

Re: Query relating to Formal Grammar for RDF

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:45:53 +0100
To: Oliver Lyttleton <olyttlet@computing.dcu.ie>
cc: www-rdf-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <13470.1035377153@hoth.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

>>>Oliver Lyttleton said:
> The formal grammar for RDF (see www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax) indicates
> that a container cannot be a child element of a property element.
> Therefore, RDF statements like this are illegal, no?:
>
>
> <books>
>        <rdf:Bag>
>              <rdf:_1 resource="Matilda"/>
>              <rdf:_2 resource="The BFG"/>
>        </rdf:Bag>
> </books>
>
>
> Obviously, they're not, but according to the formal grammar, they are!
>

<snip/>

That's one reason among many why about 1.5 years ago, we started
updating the RDF specs and I edit the syntax draft.  You can read the
latest version at
  http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar

There is no real restriction on where you use RDF container (Seq,
Bag, Alt) and properties off them, so the above is OK.  It really
always was, in practice.

Dave
Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2002 08:46:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:56 GMT