- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 15:46:10 -0400
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>, "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Cool! There is only one little thing. Right now the spec allows "aliases" for symbol space names. Those aliases are not required to be IRIs (otherwise I do not see a purpose for them). So, something like "abc"^^foobar&>%$ is also possible (in principle). It would be wrong to write it as "abc"^^<foobar&>%$> since foobar&>%$ is not an iri. On the other hand, I do not see those aliases as terribly useful in any form or shape. I included them because Jos wanted them. So, I would be perfectly happy to throw them out. --michael > > Okay, I think I see a consensus here (more or less proposed by Jos and > Michael at different times): > (1) "foo"^^<bar> > > This is the normal, full syntax for constants. For example: > > "http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator"^^<http://www.w3.org/2007/rif#iri> > > (2) foo:bar > > is shorthand for > > "expand(foo)bar"^^<http://www.w3.org/2007/rif#iri> > > except on the right-hand-side of a ^^. > > (3) "foo"^^bar:baz > > is shorthand for > > "foo"^^<expand(bar)baz> > > This means that the CURIE syntax (a:b) is context sensitive; it's read > differently on the right-hand-side of ^^. > > (4) <foo> > > This is not allowed. The pointy-brackets are only allowed as part of > the ^^ construct. Maybe someday we can figure out a way to allow it, but > right now it has problems. > > (5) "foo"^^bar > > is allowed for aliasing (I don't quite follow this), but doesn't > interact with the above. > > ================================================================ > > If I'm understanding everyone correctly, we can all live with that. > Yes? > > -- Sandro > > >
Received on Friday, 2 May 2008 19:47:17 UTC