W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > October 2010

Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 21:45:07 +0100
Message-ID: <4CBE0353.4090802@webr3.org>
To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
CC: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Toby Inkster wrote:
> How about:
> 
> """
> After processing, the following triples will be generated:
> 
>   _:john foaf:mbox <mailto:john@example.org> .
>   _:sue foaf:mbox <mailto:sue@example.org> .
>   _:john foaf:knows _:sue .
> 
> The blank node identifiers ("_:john" and "_:sue") are arbitrary and
> implementations are not required to maintain the same identifiers as
> occur in the RDFa markup. The above data could have equivalently been
> represented as:
> 
>   _:a foaf:mbox <mailto:john@example.org> .
>   _:b foaf:mbox <mailto:sue@example.org> .
>   _:a foaf:knows _:b .
> 
> For clarity, this document retains blank node identifiers in examples,
> but developers must not rely on RDFa implementations returning
> identifiers that are consistent with the RDFa markup.
> """
> 

+1 from me - perfectly clear imho
Received on Tuesday, 19 October 2010 20:46:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:21 UTC