The correct way to define a finite unordered set?

• From: Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru>
• Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 20:39:31 +0300
• To: semantic-web@w3.org
• Message-ID: <1509212371.5656.3.camel@narod.ru>

What is the correct way to describe a finite unordered set (listing all
its elements)?

Should I use rdf:Bag?

>From https://www.w3.org/2007/02/turtle/primer/

<http://example.org/courses/6.001>
    s:students [
        a rdf:Bag;
        rdf:_1 <http://example.org/students/Amy>;
        rdf:_2 <http://example.org/students/Mohamed>;
        rdf:_3 <http://example.org/students/Johann>;
        rdf:_4 <http://example.org/students/Maria>;
        rdf:_5 <http://example.org/students/Phuong>.
    ].

Wouldn't it be better like the following (with some namespace rdfx
which is not defined by the standards)?

<http://example.org/courses/6.001>
    s:students [
        a rdfx:Bag;
        rdfx:Element <http://example.org/students/Amy>;
        rdfx:Element <http://example.org/students/Mohamed>;
        rdfx:Element <http://example.org/students/Johann>;
        rdfx:Element <http://example.org/students/Maria>;
        rdfx:Element <http://example.org/students/Phuong>.
    ].

The first example contains unnecessary for unordered set position
numbers. The second example seems more reasonable.

What it the right way?

Received on Saturday, 28 October 2017 17:40:01 UTC