- 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