- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>
- Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2001 10:09:45 +0100
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 12:12 PM 8/30/01 -0700, pat hayes wrote:
>I understand that, but that still leaves open the issue that I was
>raising, which is: given that it doesn't have the properties contiguous,
>what does that entail? Are the 'missing' elements really there (but not
>mentioned), or are they genuinely not there? So in my example, if
>xxx rdf:_1 aaa
>xxx rdf:_3 ccc
>does xxx have two, or at least three, members?
Can the formalism be agnostic about this? i.e. that the member
corresponding to rdf:_2 may or may not exist, and if it does exist its
value is not stated by the above. In the absence of an rdf:lastThing or
equivalent, the same being true for any value of rdf:_n not explicitly stated.
#g
------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne Baltimore Technologies
Strategic Research Content Security Group
<Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com> <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<http://www.baltimore.com>
------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2001 14:49:23 UTC