- From: Jesse Weaver <weavej3@rpi.edu>
- Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 19:42:37 +0000
- To: ivan@w3.org
- Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Hi Ivan. Perhaps my language seemed to reflect some conflation between containers and collections, so I wasn't very clear. I am thinking at a higher level of just something that contains something. I don't care if it's an RDF container or RDF collection. All I want to do is represent a group of things (loosely defined, I have avoided the word "set" here) in RDF. It would be nice to be able to say in a single statement: <group> <contains> <thing> . You cannot do this with RDF collections. You can do it with RDF containers using rdfs:member. It seems that we should have some way of doing this, regardless of whether RDF containers are deprecated. Jesse Weaver Ph.D. Student, Patroon Fellow Tetherless World Constellation Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~weavej3/ ==============Original message text=============== On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 8:09:22 EDT Ivan Herman wrote: Jesse, - There is no formal resolution on containers yet. There has been some discussions, and deprecating containers has indeed been raised as one of the candidates. - However, your usage of rdfs:member v.a.v. lists (a.k.a. collections) is a slightly different question. At them moment, there is no semantic relationships in RDFS between the terms used for lists (rdf:first, rdf:next, or rdf:List) and rdfs:member. Put it another way if I have <a> <b> (<c> <d> <e>) . I cannot infer something like <c> rdfs:member _:a . # _:a is the 'head' of the list above. I may have misunderstood what you said, though. Ivan On Aug 26, 2011, at 20:59 , Jesse Weaver wrote: > Hello RDF working group. > > Has there been consensus concerning deprecation of RDF containers in 1.1? > Specifically, I am curious about the rdfs:member property. It is very > useful for stating membership of something in a uniform way (unlike using > rdf:_1, rdf:_2, ...) and in a single triple (unlike using rdf:first and > rdf:rest). I am well aware of the distinction between containers and > collections, but it seems that RDF really needs something as simple as > rdfs:member. > > Please let me know. > > Thank you. > > Jesse Weaver > Ph.D. Student, Patroon Fellow > Tetherless World Constellation > Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute > http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~weavej3/> > > > > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/mobile: +31-641044153 PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.htmlFOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf ===========End of original message text===========
Received on Tuesday, 30 August 2011 06:51:42 UTC