W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > February 2012

On test #218: is this what we want?

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 18:18:56 +0100
Cc: W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
Message-Id: <CA894838-BFE8-48CC-984D-F304A6D32251@w3.org>
The kind of corner case that tests reveals and LC is good for...

Test 0218 says:

  <div about ="">
    <p rel="rdf:value" inlist=""/>

and the SPARQL correspondent is:

  ?s <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#value> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#nil> .

I must admit I was surprised seeing this. I then looked at the processing steps and I realized that, per processing steps, this is indeed right: the very last processing step seems to work that way. 

However... is this what we really want? Somehow, intuitively, I would have expected to generate no triples at all. After all, in my intuition, @inlist 'collects' the various generated triples to be put into a list. If there are no triples then...

So: we may have to run this through the WG. Modifying the processing steps is fairly easy: the whole last step should be put aside in case [local list mapping] is empty.

As for my own bias: I am more in favour of not to generate any triples at all.


Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2012 17:19:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:30 UTC