- From: Christian De Sainte Marie <csma@fr.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 14:51:26 +0200
- To: public-rif-dev@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OFA7A0B08B.B9FC8629-ONC12577AD.003D3B12-C12577AD.0046A20F@fr.ibm.com>
Harold, Writing down our reply to Thomas Krekeler's question, below, I checked again what FLD and BLD said. You pointed out that BLD said that: "For the subscript n it is understood that n?0, i.e. the ellipsis indicates zero or more terms" [1]. But nothing says (or I could not find it) where it says that the empty args element must be omitted (and, no, it is not abvious; for instance, I had to check for the items sub-element in lists... and I found out that PRD required the element even if empty, whereas BLD and Core did not [2] => we need to issue an erratum on PRD). Furthermore, FLD does not even seem to mention the difference between n and m subscripts (i.e. that n>=0 and m>=1) => we probably need to correct that in BLD and FLD too (not sure if this is an erratum properly said, though). Errata aside, do you (and everybody) agree if I tell TK that the empty args element, like any other empty role element, must be omitted in RIF/XML and that this will be made explicit in the next release of the specs? Or are there cases where an empty role element is valid RIF/XML? Cheers, Christian [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-bld/#Mapping_from_the_Presentation_Syntax_to_the_XML_Syntax [2] I traced back the difference to the an ambiguous resolution that we passed on May 4, 2010, and that was implemented differently in PRD and Core/BLD/FLD: I implemented the decision litterally, copying the schema fragment in the reference email [3], whereas Harold implemented it in a way that made the items element optional. [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2010Apr/0032.html IBM 9 rue de Verdun 94253 - Gentilly cedex - FRANCE Tel./Fax: +33 1 49 08 29 81 From: Thomas Krekeler <krekeler@ontoprise.de> To: public-rif-dev@w3.org Date: 22/09/2010 16:03 Subject: args tag in RIF XML serialization Sent by: public-rif-dev-request@w3.org Hello, which of the following (partial) XML code is valid RIF XML? 1) No args tag: <Atom> <op><Const type="&rif;iri">http://test.org/P</Const></op> </Atom> 2) Empty args tag: <Atom> <op><Const type="&rif;iri">http://test.org/P</Const></op> <args ordered="yes"/> </Atom> In [1] there is no question mark characterizing the args tag as optional, so I would go for 2 and view 1 as invalid. By reading the XML schema ([1]) on the other hand I think 1 is valid but 2 is not. Thanks for your help. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-fld/#Mapping_of_the_Non-annotated_RIF-FLD_Language [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-fld/#Baseline_Schema_Module Yours, Thomas - - - Thomas Krekeler Development ontoprise GmbH ? know how to use Know-how - - - General Electric selects SemanticGuide from ontoprise as a corporate standard for providing intelligent advisory systems for Jenbacher http://www.ontoprise.de/en/home/news/news-en/general-electric-uses-semanticguide/ - - - An der RaumFabrik 29; 76227 Karlsruhe; Germany Tel.: +49 721 509809-51; Fax: +49 721 509809-11 mailto:krekeler@ontoprise.de, www: http://www.ontoprise.com Registered Office: Karlsruhe, Germany, HRB 109540 Managing Directors: Prof. Dr. Jürgen Angele, Hans-Peter Schnurr - - - Sauf indication contraire ci-dessus:/ Unless stated otherwise above: Compagnie IBM France Siege Social : 17 avenue de l'Europe, 92275 Bois-Colombes Cedex RCS Nanterre 552 118 465 Forme Sociale : S.A.S. Capital Social : 612.509.964 ? SIREN/SIRET : 552 118 465 03644
Received on Wednesday, 29 September 2010 12:52:08 UTC