Re: Notation for sets in n3

--- Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com> wrote:

> 
> Hm.. what about sets of sets then?
> |a |b c| |d e f|| would be hard to parse I guess :->
Oeps! -- did not think about sets of sets.
How about:
\a \b c/ \d e f//?
Still funny looking but easier to parse.
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Received on Friday, 20 August 2004 08:05:43 UTC