Re: #rdf-containers-syntax-ambiguity, #rdf-containers-syntax-vs-schema

Dan Connolly wrote:

> 
> (by "ducks" you don't mean "does not answer", right? 

Right, I should have said answers.

>it
> *does* provide an answer in that case, right?
> 
>   _:genid <rdf:type> <rdf:Bag>.
>   _:genid <rdf:_1>   "1" .
>   _:genid <rdf:_2>   "2" .
>   _:genid <rdf:_1>   "?" .

Yes.

> 
> That's an inconsistency, since _1 is functional
> and "?" <> "1". But inconsistency isn't a syntax issue.
> 

Maybe not for here, but something I've been wondering about.
As things stand there is no domain constraint on rdf:_nnn.
When you say _1 is functional, is that a property of
rdf:_1 wherever it is found, or is that a property of rdf:_1
when it is applied to containers?

Brian

Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2001 12:44:43 UTC