W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > June 2004

On rdf:parseType non-qualified values. DAML+OIL annotation on the same subject.

From: Manuel Vzquez Acosta <manu@chasqui.cu>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 14:34:21 -0400
To: <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20040622184204.469D7A29F2@frink.w3.org>

Hi all:

I'm wondering why just rdf:parseType values are not require to be a resource
identified by its URI.
I think it'd be better to have something like:

<ex:Stuff rdf:parseType="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Bag">
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.example.com/items#1"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource=" http://www.example.com/items#2"/>
</ex:Stuff>

Then DAML+OIL "daml:collection" parseType (written as %daml;collection)
would be fully qualified in the DAML+OIL namespace instead. As it is now, is
just a 'reserved' string for the parses to take account of it. 

Moreover, DAML+OIL parses must recognize this string to have a special
meaning, and I think the whole point of RDF is NOT to give any special
meaning but to resource (I know rdf:parseType is just a RDF/XML shortcut,
and therefore not part of the RDF semantics). But I still think constraining
rdf:parseType to be resources would lead to a more extendable language; not
to mention that other RDF-flavored languages could be created to describe
such a new parseType.

Regards,
Manuel.

Lic. Manuel Vzquez Acosta.
Grupo Chasqui
UCLV.
Received on Tuesday, 22 June 2004 15:01:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:07 GMT