Re: Poll of the WG on list management (ISSUE-106)

On 10 September 2011 08:52, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> ISSUE-106 is on whether we would add some sort of a list management to RDFa, ie, whether there would be some syntax to generate, in RDF terms, rdf:List structures. In terms of Turtle (which has a nice surface syntax for this) we would like to be able to generate something like
>
> <blasubject> <blapredicate> ( "one list element" <twolistelement> ) .
>
> We had a discussion on this on our last Telco[1]. This was preceded by an email discussion which lead to a possible design by Gregg[2]. That design shows that it is possible to add this to RDFa with a relatively minimal change to the processing rules. The design is sound, in the sense that it has already been implemented by two independent implementation.
>
> Although [2] may not be the final design (see separate mails on that), it proves that it is _possible_ to do it. Hence, we have to decide whether we do it or not.
>
> On the meeting we had a straw poll and everybody on the call (ie, Gregg, Ivan, Steven, Ted, Niklas, Stéphane) agreed _in principle_ to add this. ("In principle" because we still have to decide whether [2] is the solution, or a modification thereof.) However, we did not feel we had the necessary number of people to make a formal decision. It was decided to make this, if possible, by email. So:
>
> PROPOSAL: The WG agrees to add a syntax and processing rules to RDFa 1.1 whereby RDF lists could be generated.
>
> Can we try to get this poll through email? We could then formally put it into the minutes next Thursday and close the ISSUE one way or other.

+1 for RDFa syntax supporting RDF lists.

- Reece

Received on Monday, 12 September 2011 15:56:39 UTC