W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cwm-talk@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: Notation for sets in n3

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:34:21 +0200
To: "naudts guido <naudts_vannoten" <naudts_vannoten@yahoo.com>
Cc: public-cwm-talk@w3.org, Yosi Scharf <syosi@mit.edu>
Message-ID: <OF4E597F37.0ED83618-ONC1256EF4.003D9B1D-C1256EF4.004509CE@agfa.com>

Hm.. what about sets of sets then?
|a |b c| |d e f|| would be hard to parse I guess :->

Indeed, as Yosi wrote,
  "no matter what we do, readability is compromised"
also something like
  _{a _{b c} _{d e f}}

Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/

naudts guido <naudts_vannoten@yahoo.com>
Sent by: public-cwm-talk-request@w3.org
18/08/2004 13:08

        To:     public-cwm-talk@w3.org
        cc:     Yosi Scharf <syosi@mit.edu>
        Subject:        Re: Notation for sets in n3

Why not use:
|a b c|
It looks a bit funny but it's easy to use once it
becomes a habit and it's easy to parse.

--- Yosi Scharf <syosi@mit.edu> wrote:

> Recently, it was decided that Cwm should have
> support for sets.
> This leads to the question, what delimeter should a
> set have in n3? The
> problem is n3 already use every ascii delimeter I
> can think of.
>     (...) is taken for lists
>     {...} is taken for formulae
>     [...] is taken for anonymous nodes
>     <...> is taken for resources
> My father suggested ..., but being as that cannot
> be typed on a
> standard keyboard, is unlikely to be useful.
> My personal opinion is something like {|...|} would
> be best. Something
> like $(...) might also work. It seems no matter what
> we do, readability
> is compromised.
> Yosi

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
Received on Wednesday, 18 August 2004 12:34:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:28:22 UTC