- From: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>
- Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:51:04 +0100
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- CC: kifer@cs.sunysb.edu, RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Hi Bijan, Bijan Parsia wrote: >>>> >>>> They all have >>>> different structure, and they can appear at different levels of >>>> nesting. >>>> So it does not make a good sense to just write ?x#ex:Name. > > > And, in fact, they can have different named types associated with them > as well. </chair> Well, it is the easy case, when they have different named type, because you can select them by type name, instead of by element name. >> I am not sure this is a good assumption. It feels wrong to me. The >> different >> instances of Name in my example are just different classes. I may chose >> to use the same name "because I can" (pardon my plagiarizing of Bill >> Clinton :-). > > And since they can, in fact, have different named types associated with > them reinforces your point. I do not understand how the different named types reinforce Michael's point; but that's maybe not so important, since Michael's point might be beside the point, anyway (see my reply to Michael [1]) > I was just wondering about the status of groups and substitution groups > in this proposal. I am confused: isn't that clear from the proposal (section 3.4)? Cheers, Christian [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Mar/0087.html
Received on Tuesday, 17 March 2009 12:52:33 UTC