- 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>
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}} hm.. -- 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. Guido --- 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! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Received on Wednesday, 18 August 2004 12:34:57 UTC