Re: Proposal to resolve ISSUE-102 (well-formed lists)

On Nov 9, 2012, at 2:48 AM, Richard Cyganiak wrote:

> ISSUE-102: Shall we highlight Turtle's list structures as "Well-Formed Lists" in one of our Recs?
> PROPOSAL: Define the concept “well-formed list” in detail in RDF Schema, including a nice diagram.


> State that any use of terms from the collections vocabulary SHOULD be part of a well-formed list.

-1.  This is too strong. Subgraphs of a WFL graph need not be WFL, for example. For some purposes, all one needs to know is that some item is in the list somewhere: we should not make it illegal to have graphs saying just this.

> Update Semantics to remove discussion of collections in 3.3.3.

If this just means moving this stuff from Semantics to Concepts, then +1.


> Update Turtle and RDF/XML to refer to well-formed lists when introducing the respective syntax shorthands. Send an email to OWL WG comments list informing them of this and suggest that future versions of OWL do the same.

IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile

Received on Monday, 12 November 2012 09:25:28 UTC