- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:20:34 +0900
- To: drew.mcdermott@yale.edu
- Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org
On Dec 31, 2004, at 9:36 AM, Drew McDermott wrote: [snip] >> ***I don't know whether the same perform instance can appear >> in two or more constructs.*** > > Syntactically it certainly can, because we routinely use rdf:ID's to > refer to occurrences of performs. Small pedantic RDF note: There is no such thing as an "rdf:ID". rdf:ID is a syntactic construct for indicating and abbreviating (and enforcing a sort of pointless integrity constraint) on URIs. So, technically, we routinely use URIs to refer to occurrences of performs. (Note how rdf:ID="foo" and rdf:about="#foo" will (tend to) generate the same URI in the same position. They are sugar. Also, in an RDF/XML *document* (not graph), you can have only one rdf:ID with the same value in the scope of a given base. This was, roughly, to distinguish "Definitions" which *introduced* a particular URI from other references. But it's a distinction without interesting force. > You can toss that ID in instead of > the entire description. (In the surface syntax, you would use a tag > as a step; the current grammar might not allow that.) [snip] Seems a reasonable extension...any pitfalls? I presume there is already something in place to handle multiple executions of the same perform (i.e., the occurance/execution split). Cheers, BIjan Parsia.
Received on Friday, 31 December 2004 02:20:35 UTC