W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > July 2002

rdf:parseType=Collection and rdf:List

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 19:53:13 -0400
To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
Cc: mdean@bbn.com, www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20020715195313E.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

From: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Subject: Re: OWL Reference Description for F2F 3
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 01:00:55 +0200

> > The reference description is also missing entries for
> >     owl:List
> >     owl:first
> >     owl:rest
> >     owl:nil
> > in the list of language elements.
> >
> > As well, the expansion of the collection should use owl: for these
> > resources.
> 
> A while ago RDFCore proposed those to be
>     rdf:List
>     rdf:first
>     rdf:rest
>     rdf:nil
> where @prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
> That was in message
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jun/0003.html
> 
> -- ,
> Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/

It would be useful if the RDF Syntax working draft was updated to completely
reflect this decision.  As of now, only about half of the necessary changes
are in there.  I also don't believe that the necessary changes have been
made to the RDF MT document.

Perhaps this would be a good point to include in this week's telecon, as it
sure would be nice to be able to remove the section on collections from the
reference description and instead point to RDF Core WG documents, even if
only drafts.

peter
Received on Monday, 15 July 2002 19:53:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:51 GMT