- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:58:21 -0400
- To: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>
- Cc: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, public-rif-wg@w3.org
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:29:46 +0100
Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr> wrote:
> Michael Kifer wrote:
> > [...] This is what I was
> > planning to use for aggregates (I proposed this several months ago in an email)
> > and for shorthands like a[b->c b->d] == a[b-> {c d}]
>
>
> Does == mean equivalent?
yes
> If we do something like this, how do we deal with set-valued attributes?
>
> I mean: is a[b->{c d} b->{e f}] equivalent to a[b->{c d e f}]
yes
> or a[b->{{c d}{e f}}] or a[b->{c d {e f}}] etc?
No. The above is invalid syntax. The domain does not contain sets - only
elements. So, the value of an attribute is a set, not a set of sets.
michael
>
> (Btw, this is another form of the question I had in mind with what you called my "puzzle" about a[b->a.b], in [1]).
>
> Cheers,
>
> Christian
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Mar/0009.html
>
>
Received on Thursday, 12 March 2009 17:59:05 UTC