- From: Benjamin Nowack <bnowack@appmosphere.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:54:11 +0200
- To: Garret Wilson <garret@globalmentor.com>
- Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
On 25.07.2007 06:43:45, Garret Wilson wrote: >rdf:Seq is "simple", eh? ;) simpler than collections, yes But is that still around? Still being officially recommended? yes >Frankly, rdf:Seq (with its rdf:_1, rdf:_2, etc.) >is a worse hack that rdf:List. to discuss whether it's a beautiful feature will not be rewarding, I assume. but it it does the trick, is part of the spec, reasonably compact in rdf/xml, and works with sparql. >Maybe we could create properties >v:email1, v:email2, etc. Oh, wait---if we use v:preferredEmail we're >essentially doing the same thing, it's just that we lose the ability to >have a secondary preferred email---it's like having v:email1 without a >v:email2. I don't see how that is less ugly than RDF's built-ins. >Oh, the hacks I have to choose among! When are we just going to fix RDF? >Can I fix it? Please? Please? ;) let's not turn this into another pointless thread.. Benjamin -- Benjamin Nowack http://bnode.org/
Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2007 16:54:27 UTC