- From: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 17:35:00 -0500
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On Thursday, June 14, 2001, at 06:36 AM, Brian McBride wrote: > _;bag <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> > <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Bag> . Typo: _:bag instead of _;bag > xmlns:foo+"http://foo/"> Typo: the + should be an = > </foo:Bar> > </foo:Bar> Typo: Instead of closing <rdf:RDF> you close <foo:Bar> twice > <rdf:li rdf:parseType="Resource"> > <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://foo/Bar"/> > <rdf:li> Typo: The last <rdf:li> should be a </rdf:li> > <foo:Bar> > ... > </foo:bar> Typo: This should be </foo:Bar> (note capitalization) Can you please run these tests through SiRPAC/CWM before submitting them next time. That should catch these silly typos. > Whether this represents a legal collection of triples > depends on the definition of foo:Bar. If foo:Bar is > subclass of container then it is illegal. Can you elaborate on why this is? I believe it is because of the functional container properties thing, which we as a working group have not yet made a decision on to my knowledge (do they only apply to containers or any resource?). > rdf:li elements as typed nodes - a bizarre case > but handled regularly I'm not sure that this is specified in the M&S (perhaps this should be an issue) but it's certainly not a good idea to make something both a class and a property. Let's not have a test case that does this, please. Especially since rdf:li is a special syntactic element -- I do not think we should allow it to be used in this way. > <rdf:value="barfoo"/> Typo: This is invalid XML. > <rdf:Description> > <rdf:li>1</rdf:li> > <rdf:li>2</rdf:li> > <rdf:Description> Typo: The last <rdf:Description> should be a closing tag. Otherwise, the test cases look pretty good. -- [ "Aaron Swartz" ; <mailto:me@aaronsw.com> ; <http://www.aaronsw.com/> ]
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2001 18:35:09 UTC