- From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:32:16 +0100
- To: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
- CC: RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Look like good proposals. My assumption is that we'd want the one-to-one mapping but that's to be discussed I guess. Minor comment: The phrasing of the additional semantic condition (9) uses the term "identifies". Most RDF lists are constructed with blank nodes for which "identify" seems like the wrong term. I think is just an editorial rather than a substantive remark. Dave Jos de Bruijn wrote: > At the face-to-face, there seemed to be some support for connecting RDF > lists and RIF lists in RDF-RIF combinations. I believe this can be done > by suitably extending the semantics of this combinations. The following > wiki page lists two possible extensions that both seem somehow > reasonable. Note that in both extensions the semantics of RDF lists is > slightly restricted: we cannot allow the same element to identify two > different lists. This is illustrated by the test cases on the same wiki > page: > > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF-RDF-Lists > > > > > Best, Jos >
Received on Tuesday, 21 April 2009 13:33:07 UTC