- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 09:36:36 +0100
- To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>
- CC: w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Hi Graham, Thanks for this. One question: Graham Klyne wrote: > > NOTE: "reification" is deliberately called out as a distinct syntax > production, so that there is a place to hang the semantics that distinguish > it from any other collection of facts. There is some syntactic ambiguity > here that needs to be resolved at some level; e.g. adjusting the abstract > syntax so that rdf:subject, rdf:object, rdf:predicate can appear *only* in > a production for R (and not for A). In M&S 1.0 the statements of a reification (i.e. the rdf:type, rdf:subject, etc ...) are no different from other statements. What difference are you considering introducing here? Brian
Received on Sunday, 17 June 2001 04:38:21 UTC