Re: Action-931 EBNF in PRD, Appendix 9 from Gary Hallmark on 2009-10-27 (public-rif-wg@w3.org from October 2009)

From: Gary Hallmark <gary.hallmark@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:55:41 -0700
To: Stella Mitchell <stellamit@gmail.com>
CC: Christian De Sainte Marie <csma@fr.ibm.com>, RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4AE66F3D.1010508@oracle.com>

Stella Mitchell wrote:
>    --  the PS version of test case [1] is not valid according to the
> Appendix 9 EBNF because a membership formula (ex:o#ex:T) is not a
> valid action_block.
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Conflict_resolution
>
>   
I don't remember deciding that

ex:o#ex:T

is not a valid fact. That seems silly. Why make me write

ex:o[rdf:type ex:T]

which of course is exactly the same thing?

Received on Tuesday, 27 October 2009 03:58:03 UTC